******WARNING: POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD********

Day 1 - Quiberon demands a mortal maiden in AM (a "calm and sunny morning")
- at night (after "the great silver bells in the sapphire tower had tolled ten"
and "when the moon is high") Philador is carried off by the Grand Mo-Gull,
and Akbar picks the Golden Pear - Benny comes to life in Boston ("it was a warm
starry evening in May") - Tattypoo falls through the witch's window ("on the
same evening Philador and Akbar flew off from the Ozure Isles") - Philador spends
remainder of night in witch's hut
Day 2 - Philador releases Herby, begins trip South, arriving at Up Town in time for
lunch - Benny lands in Oz near Emerald City, meets Scarecrow, Trot, is carried off
by Akbar, arrives Quiberon's cave around noon - after lunch, Philador, Herby &
High Boy head south - Benny's party escapes from Quiberon, Cave City, Roundabouties,
in the afternoon, meet Philador's party in Munchkin Country (High Boy predicts that
they will arrive at the Emerald City "in time for tea") - arrive EC late
evening ("it was night and only a few stars twinkled in the sky"). Queen Orin
returns to Sapphire City, is attacked by Quiberon ("on the same evening that Trot
and her companions were arriving in the Emerald City" and "her jeweled crown
glittered and flashed in the star light"), rescued by Akbar. Quiberon stopped by
Wizard - explanations until late at night - feast begins "long past midnight.
Day 3 - "Not until the silver bells in the castle tower tolled ten did anyone
above stairs stir from his silken couch" - Grand tour of Sapphire City - Wizard
& Ozma undo as much of Mombi's mischief as possible - return to EC in time for
lunch ("It was noon time when they dropped down lightly in the gardens of
Ozma's castle.")
Cheeriobed, Orin & Philador remain in the EC for "ten days."
Note: The text of GIANT HORSE compresses the action into a very small amount of time,
and the characters do a lot of traveling. The text says that "it had taken
the golden wings nearly nine hours to carry Akbar to the Emerald City" and that it
took them "scarcely five to bring him back." Thompson places Akbar's arrival
in the Ozure Isles at "a little after noon." That means that Benny and the
Scarecrow met Trot around 7 AM (day 2 of the chronology) and that Akbar left the Ozure
Isles a little after 10 PM the previous night. No times are given after this
point until after the parties are united and High Boy crosses the river (Chapter 15--a
branch of the Munchkin River, according to the IWOC map of Oz). There it's
noted that the time is "late afternoon ... and the sun [was] sinking lower and lower
behind the hills." By the time Trot sights the EC, "it was night and
only a few stars twinkled in the sky." It takes them less than an hour to reach
the city from that point, and on their arrival Thompson says, "It was still fairly
early."
According to the WORLD ALMANAC, an area between 30 and 40 degrees north latitude gets
between 12 and a quarter and 14 and three-quarters hours of daylight (measured from
sunrise to sunset) during the month of May. (I am assuming that Oz has a latitude
corresponding to that of most of the midwestern United States.) Nightfall in
May ranges between about 6:40 at the beginning of the month to about 7:45 at the end
of the month. That would put Trot's sighting of the Emerald City's glow between
7 and 8 o'clock, and her arrival at the EC between 8 and 9 o'clock--in accordance with
Thompson's statement that "it was still fairly early." Queen Orin's
arrival in the Sapphire City would have been about the same time (the moon had apparently
not yet risen, since the star light on her crown is the only light mentioned).
Now--can this be reconciled with (a) Akbar's flight and Trot & Philador's return
journey; and (b) the projected size of Oz? Not with any great exactitude,
unfortunately. Was the difference in Akbar's flight times because he had to
navigate by sight (difficult in the dark) or because he had a strong tailwind coming
back from the EC? (The text describes the wind "rushing down [Trot's]
throat about a mile a minute," but this is probably hyperbole on Thompson's part.
Otherwise Akbar would have traveled almost 300 air miles, which is far larger
than most estimates of Oz's size.) In order for Philador and Trot to meet, two things
must have happened: High Boy must have turned far east out of the Gilliken Mountains (possible,
since none of the party were sure where the Emerald City was) and Trot's party must had
traveled a fair number of miles after sliding off the Roundabouties' roof. The two
parties must have rendezvoused no later than 3:00, and High Boy must really have been
traveling in order to reach the EC by 8:00--perhaps as fast as the Sawhorse.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Wed Aug 30, 2000 6:05 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE transport
Nathan
DeHoff wrote:
<<>reaching Oz. That desire might reach its apex in GIANT HORSE,
>which has a trip that took me 20 years to understand!
And you understand it now? I still don't, although it has been
considerably less than 20 years since I first read _Giant Horse_. As far
as I can figure out, Benny's transportation is either an indication that Oz
is underground (highly unlikely, in the face of most other evidence), or
just a plot hole (in the most literal sense).>>
The first two or three times I read GIANT HORSE, I didn't even grasp the
literal meaning of Thompson's words. I developed a completely different
picture of Benny's trip to Oz, which fit better with the other books than
what Thompson really wrote. But when I casually mentioned my interpretation
as if it were standard, the surprised responses of other Ozzy Digest
members made me look back at the text again.
Here's how I explained my reading, back in July 1998:
<<I started with the firm knowledge that plunging through the crust
of the Earth can bring you to the Mangaboo Kingdom, but not to Oz. Given
that, the only way to make sense of Benny's trip is that he stumbled into a
construction site and was blasted into the air along with a hillock's worth
of soil, though the "workmen...had not intended to blow such a terrific
hole in the earth"; the stone man's weight pulls him down through the dirt
cloud ("a thin crust of earth [followed by] a damp darkness") and then
through the air ("a crust of blue sky [and] blazing sunlight"); and he ends
up on, and in, the soil of Oz.
<<One could argue that Benny's interpretation of how he got to Oz
may not be reliable, given his limited experience of the world and his
undeniable rockheadedness. But a literal reading of GIANT HORSE certainly
says that Boston is built over land near the Emerald City. Folks here have
long thought we're at the hub of the solar system!>>
Something folks can consider when we discuss the next book in the series.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Sep 2, 2000 12:50 pm
Subject: who gets to go?
Greg Gick wrote:
<<About Benny and his "plot hole"--I'm taking the tack that Randy Hoffman
has in his so-far-incomplete Oz stories--that certain people are marked by
the fairies for certain adventures. That implies that the Immortals are
still, at least nominally, watching over the Outside World and probably
watching for magic use. Since Benny was "Brought to life" by magic and was
causing a ruckus (however innocently) my take on it was that the fairies
decided he'd be better off in a land where he'd fit in and zapped him to Oz
without telling anyone. Kind of like my idea on Notta Bit More in Cowardly
Lion--what are the chances of hitting EXACTLY on a magical phrase off the
top of one's head?>>
Interesting notion. There's some canonical support for this: Aunt Em
suspects Dorothy was marked by the fairies, and I believe Cap'n Bill might
say something similar about Trot. Trot's journey from the California coast
to the cave where she meets the Ork in SCARECROW is almost definitely
mermaid-aided.
On the other hand, this approach means that only certain people in the
Great Outside World can reach Oz, so some of the books' young
readers--indeed most of them, given the odds--will never be able to make
that journey. And that in turn might remove some of the books' appeal: the
hint that at any random moment an American child might get a chance to
visit Oz.
Atticus Gannaway has also written fiction that explores the notion of
someone being brought to Oz at a particular time for his benefit, as well
as Oz's. But that's a one-time spell, not a regular pattern.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: Tyler Jones <tyler.jones at b...>
Date: Fri Nov 3, 2000 6:35 pm
Subject: BCF
>
Where is everybody (other than Scott)??? We're supposed to
> be discussing _Giant Horse_ now, you know...
Good point. I'll make a few comments...
########## SOME SPOILERS FOR GIANT HORSE ##########
_Giant Horse_ has always been one of my favorite FF books, mainly
due to its historical content, as well as some of the new locations.
I've always thought that Sapphire City, on the shores of Lake Orizon,
is second only to the Emerald City in beauty, and perhaps one of the
most romantic places in Oz, being lost and isolated for so many years.
I often wondered how a place like that could get a history book with
Trot, but one can assume that a bird dropped it by accident.
While I no longer consider Tattypoo/Orin to be "THE" GWN, since I
subscribe to Dave's Locasta theory, the intertwining of Gilikin and
Munchkin Royalty was fascinating.
Somebody once commented that this is one of the few books that features
Trot as a major character without good old Cap'n Bill. As far as I can
remember, RPT never wrote much about the Cap'n at all.
This book, combined with _Ojo_, brought me to the belief that the WWE
(the witch who lost the battle with Dorothy's house) at best ruled only
the central areas of Munchkinland, with the two Royal Families ruling
the rest.
One thing that always disturbed me though was RPT's observation that
Mombi could fall in love despite being ugly. Even if you assume a very
shallow society, where looks are overly-important, such that nobody would
fall in love with an ugly person, still that ugly person may love somebody
else.
People often use this book in combination with _Lost Princess_ to define the
ages of the three little girls of Oz (Dorothy, Betsy and Trot). When Philador
says that he has been ten years old for many years, Trot says "me too". Note
that Trot may not actually be 10, she may just be confirming that she has
also remained at a constant age, although I usually go with 10 as well.
########## END OF SPOILERS FOR GIANT HORSE ##########
Tyler Jones

From: RMorris306 at a...
Date: Fri Nov 3, 2000 10:16 pm
Subject: [Nonestica] Giant Horse
In a message dated 11/3/00 7:24:06 PM, DaveH47 at m... writes:
<< Where is everybody (other than Scott)??? We're supposed to
be discussing _Giant Horse_ now, you know... >>
Well, just to start the ball rolling...
I always thought this was one of Thompson's best books. It's nice to see
Trot once more becoming the heroine of an Oz book (a role she'd really had
only once before, though she'd also appeared in two of Baum's non-Oz
fantasies I only learned about years later), and the characters around her
were among Thompson's more inspired ones. Her tendency to give characters
pun-filled names ending in "y" (like Benny and Herby) can be a bit grating,
but Benny was a very interesting character, and even Herby wasn't too bad.
The way Benny came to life and ended up in Oz was a bit quick, though,
especially compared with the way Baum generally handled such things. (Oz
isn't underground and it certainly isn't underneath Boston...otherwise the
current Big Dig would have even more problems than it's got already.) Since I
work in Boston, I once tried to figure out which "Public Benefactor" Benny
was supposed to be by looking around at the statues there...my best guess was
that he was Ralph Waldo Emerson, since most of the statues are made of metal,
not (like Benny) stone. Of course, this was over seven decades ago, and Benny
himself is presumably still in Oz, so maybe he was REPLACED with a metal
statue...
I also liked the fact that Thompson is getting more "Ozzy" in her
treatment of her villains. Rather than have them summarily executed like
Mombi in LOST KING or Glegg in KABUMPO, she let Akbad reform (to an extent)
like Ugu the Shoemaker and Krewl and even (in his last appearance in a Baum
book) Ruggedo. The other characters in the book are very Ozzy and, for a
horse named for a piece of furniture, High Boy was definitely memorable even
if he hardly deserved to have the book named after him...
Thompson's main goal seems to have been to explain who ruled the
Gillikins and the Munchkins, since, unlike the well-established Glinda and
Tin Woodman who ruled the other two Oz countries, Baum hadn't developed
either very much. (Now that I think of it, despite what was said in LAND, the
Tin Woodman really DOES qualify as an Emperor...since, like the other three
major Oz subdivisions, the Winkie Country includes many smaller dominions
with kings of their own.) I can't think of anyone particularly objecting to
her handling of the Munchkin situation (well, apart from undercutting Unk
Nunkie's earlier claim to the throne, which she'd probably forgotten but more
or less resolved in OJO); King Cheeriobed and his family were all delightful
characters. But she's gotten a lot of criticism for her treatment of the Good
Witch of the North, from her name (Tattypoo seems...I don't know...a bit
"tatty," even if the name WAS...as I only realized when someone here pointed
it out...inspired by one of my favorite musicals, "The Mikado, or, The Town
of Titupu" by Gilbert & Sullivan) to her final reversion to Queen Orin
accompanied by the loss of her powers. I'd have rather liked to see her keep
those powers AND sovereignty of the Gillikins, alongside her husband who
ruled the Munchkins. After all, there's precedent for that sort of royal
couple both in history (Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand of Spain, for
instance) and in the Oz books (although admittedly a pair that weren't
particularly good role models, Queen Cor and King Gos in RINKITINK).
So, as it was, the Gillikins were left without a sovereign...and it did
strike me that Ozma was a bit quick to promote someone she'd just met, Joe
King of Hightown, to rule the entire country. (I'm surprised in retrospect
that, of all the existing rulers of the individual Gillikin kingdoms,
Thompson didn't have one of her own favorite characters, King Pompus of
Pumperdink, take on the role.) Still, the book tied up everything as neatly
and Ozzily as one expects from Thompson at her best, with some memorable
characters and delightful adventures. And what more can one expect of an Oz
book?
Rich

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Sat Nov 4, 2000 11:51 am
Subject: Giant Horse
********Spoilers for Giant Horse**************
This was a book that I liked much more as a child than I do today -
for some of the same reasons, oddly enough. As a child I was very
taken with the explanations of Ozian history and the resolution of
the rulership of the Munchkin and Winkie countries, which hadn't
bothered me until I read this book (though remember that the second
Oz book I read was _Wishing Horse_, so I already knew that at some
point Cheeriobed had become ruler of the Munchkins and Joe King of
the Gillikins). Rereading it now, though, I find Thompson's
"solutions" to those problems poorly thought out, and the book feels
to me as if she's forcing things simply to tie up loose ends, without
caring much about plausibility.
I did like having Trot as a major character; although it would be
hard to say that I like her better than Dorothy, I like her as much,
and she had received very little attention between _Magic_ and _Giant
Horse_. (Unfortunately, she received very little after GH either, at
least in the FF. She's a major character in my own book, _Glass Cat_,
and probably in some other non-FF books, though I don't recall any
offhand.)
I also liked Benny, though as Rich mentioned his entry into Oz isn't
handled well. It's probably the most implausible transition from
America to Oz in the whole series. Herby, Philador, Highboy, Joe
King, Cheeriobed, etc. were all sort of ehhh as far as I was
concerned.
At least a couple of illustrations bear commenting on. First, there's
the one on page 36, captioned "Dorothy at home in Oz". The character
illustrated, however, is clearly Trot; there's a picture of Dorothy,
correctly labeled, on page 77, and in it she looks like Neill's usual
version of Dorothy, whereas the one on 36 doesn't look anything like
Neill's usual Dorothy, but is reasonably like his usual Trot - though
he's less consistent in his depictions of Trot. I think that probably
Neill just provided the picture without a caption and someone at R&L
who didn't know the series well put the wrong caption on it.
The other is the color plate opposite page 272 (in my copy, at
least). Does anyone else think that it makes Trot look like a
flat-chested but very pretty and sexy 17 or so? I'll have to admit
that I've always been partial to that sort of Twenties hairstyle, as
well; I've never been one of those males who prefers long hair on
women.
Responding to others' comments:
Tyler:
>When Philador
>says that he has been ten years old for many years, Trot says "me too". Note
>that Trot may not actually be 10, she may just be confirming that she has
>also remained at a constant age, although I usually go with 10 as well.
So do I. All the other evidence in the books is consistent with an
age of about 10 for Trot. She can't really be older, or Betsy, who's
two years older, would be a teen-ager, and we can be reasonably sure
that she isn't. She might be a bit younger, but couldn't be much
younger because we know Button-Bright is younger than she is and we
know he's old enough to read by the time of _Sky Island_, which was
at least some time before they both came to Oz. Granted, some kids
can read well enough to be able to read the words "The Royal Record
Book" as young as three or four, but Button-Bright doesn't seem
likely to be that precocious. I think he's brighter than John Bell
does, but I doubt if he learned to read before he was school age.
Rich:
>It's nice to see
>Trot once more becoming the heroine of an Oz book (a role she'd really had
>only once before, though she'd also appeared in two of Baum's non-Oz
>fantasies I only learned about years later)
I'd say that she had about as big a role in _Magic_ as she did in
_Giant Horse_; in both books she was one of two major juvenile
protagonists. Granted, she _did_ more in GH, since in _Magic_ she
spent a good deal of her on-stage time rooted to the spot.
> I also liked the fact that Thompson is getting more "Ozzy" in her
>treatment of her villains. Rather than have them summarily executed like
>Mombi in LOST KING or Glegg in KABUMPO, she let Akbad reform (to an extent)
>like Ugu the Shoemaker and Krewl and even (in his last appearance in a Baum
>book) Ruggedo.
But I don't think Akbad is anything like Mombi or Glegg in terms of
villainy; he was really guilty only of sloppy thinking and not of
evil intent. The real villain of GH is Quiberon, and you notice that
he ends up as a statue.
> So, as it was, the Gillikins were left without a sovereign...and it did
>strike me that Ozma was a bit quick to promote someone she'd just met, Joe
>King of Hightown, to rule the entire country. (I'm surprised in retrospect
>that, of all the existing rulers of the individual Gillikin kingdoms,
>Thompson didn't have one of her own favorite characters, King Pompus of
>Pumperdink, take on the role.)
Or the other Gillikin ruler who had already appeared in the series -
Kinda Jolly. As of GH Pompus had only appeared to about the same
extent as KJ. Of course, neither Pompus nor Kinda Jolly had shown
themselves to be particularly adept at ruling, so maybe Ozma was just
grasping at straws. (That might be an interesting little research
project, now that I think of it: listing all the human rulers of Oz
"kingdoms," and when Ozma apparently becomes aware of them. Of
course, one would need to define "human"; Pompus and KJ obviously
are, but does Nick Chopper count? Bal Loon? The High Coco-Lorum of
Thi? The Cookywitch?)
David Hulan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sun Nov 5, 2000 2:57 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE politics
I'm away from home, so I can't provide my usual citation [general
applause], but I'll add a coupla comments on GIANT HORSE issues folks have
raised.
++++++++++++++ SPOILERS ++++++++++++++++++
I've always thought Ozma's choice of Joe King and Hyacinth to lead the
Gillikins was odd, trying to tie off a loose end that wasn't loose. This
time around it seemed even more odd because their kingdom is clearly (a)
very difficult to reach, and (b) one of those regions of Oz where some
normal physical rules don't apply, as when the storms blow up. In other
words, it seems as much like the town of shutters as like Ozure Isles or
other normative kingdoms--an odd choice to be the center of Gillikin
government.
Furthermore, the text of GIANT HORSE hints at another historic locus of
political power in the North. Orin is said to be the daughter of (as I
recall this morning) "King Gil of Gilkenny." As with the past rulers of Oz
having the syllable "Oz" in their name, the names Gil and Gilkenny seem to
be connected to authority over the larger region. Perhaps Gilkenny at one
point dominated the whole north. Perhaps Gil's family was simply making a
claim for that authority. In any event, the Gilkenny dynasty seems like a
better place to look for a ruler of the Gillikins.
But perhaps these problems are actually related. If the Gilkenny dynasty
has come down to Orin (and indeed she has governed the North as Tattypoo),
that means there's a very real possibility of Philador having a claim to
rule both Munchkinland and the Gillikins. That would be a power base to
rival Ozma's. She might have moved quickly while she had Cheeriobed's
gratitude, establishing another family as rulers of the North--a family
whose isolation would make them little more than ceremonial monarchs. In
sum, Ozma's unfathomable appointments may have been a savvy way of
consolidating her power.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sun Nov 5, 2000 2:57 pm
Subject: Benny's alter ego
Rich Morrissey wrote:
<<Since I work in Boston, I once tried to figure out which "Public
Benefactor" Benny was supposed to be by looking around at the statues
there...my best guess was that he was Ralph Waldo Emerson, since most of
the statues are made of metal, not (like Benny) stone. Of course, this was
over seven decades ago, and Benny himself is presumably still in Oz, so
maybe he was REPLACED with a metal statue...>>
We don't have many stone statues in Boston, do we? Mostly weathered brass.
Benny's sidewhiskers and frock coat indicate he was someone from the late
19th century. But the term "Public Benefactor" sounds more like a
philth--philanstr--philanthrof--good-deed-doer than like Emerson. An
industrialist or trader who endowed some public institution. Of course, an
Emersonian heritage might be visible in Benny's quest through most of the
book to become a real person.
Thompson seems to have had Boston in mind when she made the tailor who
brings Benny to life into an "old Irishman," as I recall. The person who
brings him the coat which contains the magic book is called "dusky,"
usually a marker for having African or Arab heritage.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 5:21 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] BCF
Tyler:
>While I no longer consider Tattypoo/Orin to be "THE" GWN, since I
>subscribe to Dave's Locasta theory, the intertwining of Gilikin and
>Munchkin Royalty was fascinating.
The Locasta theory is quite ingenious, but it doesn't solve ALL of the
problems that Tattypoo's story causes. Saying that Tattypoo conquered Mombi
twenty years before the plot of _Giant Horse_ seems like it must be
inaccurate. Even if we sandwich together the first 22 books enough to make
this "twenty years ago" fall before _Wizard_ (which is difficult to do),
wasn't Mombi supposed to have been deposed before the Wizard's arrival in
Oz?
>Somebody once commented that this is one of the few books that features
>Trot as a major character without good old Cap'n Bill. As far as I can
>remember, RPT never wrote much about the Cap'n at all.
He carved Peg Amy's wooden form, and taught Ojo a hornpipe, but I think
that's pretty much it. He was also mentioned in the author's note to _Gnome
King_, I think.
>This book, combined with _Ojo_, brought me to the belief that the WWE
>(the witch who lost the battle with Dorothy's house) at best ruled only
>the central areas of Munchkinland, with the two Royal Families ruling
>the rest.
Did Cheeriobed ever rule anything outside the Ozure Isles themselves? I
think the impression given in the book is that he didn't, until Ozma
promoted him. If he didn't, though, that leaves open the question as to who
ruled the northern Munchkin Country before _Giant Horse_. The beginning of
the book states the Munchkins were "ruled by a mysterious king from whom
nothing has been heard for many a year" (or something like that; I don't
have the book handy right now). It doesn't specifically say that this king
was Cheeriobed (and, indeed, when Cheeriobed IS introduced, it isn't as this
mysterious missing Munchkin monarch), but, if there WAS another Munchkin
King, what happened to him when Cheeriobed took his place?
>One thing that always disturbed me though was RPT's observation that
>Mombi could fall in love despite being ugly. Even if you assume a very
>shallow society, where looks are overly-important, such that nobody would
>fall in love with an ugly person, still that ugly person may love somebody
>else.
Agreed. Wouldn't it have made more sense if Tattypoo had said that Mombi
had fallen in love "despite her heartlessness," or something?
Nathan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 6:05 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Giant Horse
David Hulan:
>As a child I was very
>taken with the explanations of Ozian history and the resolution of
>the rulership of the Munchkin and Winkie countries, which hadn't
>bothered me until I read this book (though remember that the second
>Oz book I read was _Wishing Horse_, so I already knew that at some
>point Cheeriobed had become ruler of the Munchkins and Joe King of
>the Gillikins).
I think the first time I read Cheeriobed's name was in _Ozoplaning_, and I
was confused, since I had previously read Neill's books, and the Scarecrow
ruled the Munchkins in those books. I even briefly entertained the notion
that "Cheeriobed" might be a new name for the Scarecrow.
>She might be a bit younger, but couldn't be much
>younger because we know Button-Bright is younger than she is and we
>know he's old enough to read by the time of _Sky Island_, which was
>at least some time before they both came to Oz. Granted, some kids
>can read well enough to be able to read the words "The Royal Record
>Book" as young as three or four, but Button-Bright doesn't seem
>likely to be that precocious.
Didn't Button-Bright read some of the contents of the book, not just the
title?
> > I also liked the fact that Thompson is getting more "Ozzy" in her
> >treatment of her villains. Rather than have them summarily executed like
> >Mombi in LOST KING or Glegg in KABUMPO, she let Akbad reform (to an
>extent)
> >like Ugu the Shoemaker and Krewl and even (in his last appearance in a
>Baum
> >book) Ruggedo.
>
>But I don't think Akbad is anything like Mombi or Glegg in terms of
>villainy; he was really guilty only of sloppy thinking and not of
>evil intent.
He reminded me a little bit of Abrog, although the prophet/wizard was
working more toward his own ends than Akbad was.
Nathan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 6:14 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] The Good Witch of the North
Greg:
>I personally didn't like the dumping of the Good WItch of the North
>myself--I would have nothing against the discovery of Orin, but didn't
>anyone think to at least TRY to make Tattypoo an interesting character in
>her own right?
I wonder if Thompson originally intended to do that, but either couldn't
think of anything the Good Witch could do, or liked the "Tattypoo is Orin"
idea better than what she had planned at first. I mean, doesn't it seem a
bit odd for Thompson to give Tattypoo a name, two loyal companions, and a
lot of witchly accessories, and then to discard the whole thing after one
chapter?
Nathan

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 11:23 am
Subject: Cheeriobed
>Did Cheeriobed ever rule anything outside the Ozure Isles themselves? I
>think the impression given in the book is that he didn't, until Ozma
>promoted him. If he didn't, though, that leaves open the question as to who
>ruled the northern Munchkin Country before _Giant Horse_. The beginning of
>the book states the Munchkins were "ruled by a mysterious king from whom
>nothing has been heard for many a year" (or something like that; I don't
>have the book handy right now). It doesn't specifically say that this king
>was Cheeriobed (and, indeed, when Cheeriobed IS introduced, it isn't as this
>mysterious missing Munchkin monarch), but, if there WAS another Munchkin
>King, what happened to him when Cheeriobed took his place?
I've always assumed that the mysterious missing Munchkin monarch
referred to at the beginning of the book was Cheeriobed's father. The
specific quote is "the blue Munchkin Country is governed by a king of
whom nothing much has been heard for many a long year." In fact, in
Chapter 20 Ozma says that the Wizard has been trying to locate
Cheeriobed's father, but all his questions had "brought no change in
the magic picture, showing that Mombi has utterly destroyed the good
King of the Munchkins." So Cheeriobed's becoming King of the
Munchkins was just a normal hereditary succession. (It seems
impossible, however, that Cheeriobed's father was the monarch of the
Munchkins who appeared in _Ozma_ and _Road_, since by that time Mombi
had lost all her magic powers. That monarch must have been someone
else.)
David Hulan

From: "ruth berman" <berma005 at m...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 11:44 am
Subject: Munchkin Kings in Oz
I was tied up with other stuff this weekend, and didn't get a chance to
re-read "Giant Horse." Enjoyed the substantial comments on it by Tyler
Jones, Rich Morris, and David Hulan.
David Hulan: I think you're right that Pompus wouldn't make a good
Gillikin-wide ruler -- too hot-tempered. Kinda Jolly might be better, but
he's maybe more interested in running Kimbaloo's local economy than he would
be in paying attention to a wider territory. Your suggestion for counting
human rulers of Oz sub-kingdoms -- maybe counting rulers in general would be
more useful. For the specific task of considering what rulers Ozma might
pick when wanting to fill a vacancy for territorial ruler, there's no
special reason why the one picked has to be human (and Nick Chopper and
Glinda might both in different ways be considered non-humans). Since
apparently the majority, and certainly a plurality, of the inhabitants are
human, there'd be political advantages to choosing humans, but it's probably
not an absolute necessity?
Rich Morrissey: You commented that couldn't think of anyone who particularly
objected to RPT's handling of the Munchkin situation, apart from the
undercutting of Unk Nunkie's earlier claim to the throne, which you thought
she'd forgotten. Well, it's possible that she did, but it's also possible
that she was simply paying close attention to what Baum said. Back when
Louis Epstein was busy RPT-bashing on this issue, I looked again at what
Baum had said and what RPT was saying about the Munchkin kings, and it
struck me that the situation as Baum set it up could be read as demanding
two lines of kings. On the one hand, there's the Munchkin king who appears
briefly in "Ozma" and "Road," and then there's his description of Unk Nunkie
in "Patchwork Girl" as someone who could have been king of the Munchkins.
Baum himself may not have had any particular explanation in mind for a
connection or lack of connection between these two royals lines. Or he might
have intended (as some have suggested) that there's a lack of connection:
the new king is Ozma's appointee, and his appointment could have been a
complete displacement of the line of kings that Unk Nunkie came from. Then
again, as David Hulan pointed out at the time, Baum carefully did not say
that Unk Nunkie WOULD have been king of the Munchkins if the current king
were not in position, but only that he might have been, a phrasing that
implies that there was at least one other heir with a claim to the throne as
good as Unk's or better. Baum provides one other heir anyway, in Ojo, and
RPT's assumption that Ojo represents the family line with a claim as better
than his uncle's is perfectly reasonable in terms of what Baum said in
"Patchwork Girl." But that still doesn't explain if there's any kind of
connection or lack of connection between the royal lines of Unk and the
current Munchkin king, and it looks to me as if what RPT is doing in "Giant
Horse" is to explain the lack of connection as a difference in territories.
Baum's map shows Unk's cottage in the south Munchkin territory (somewhat at
variance with the text -- but RPT may have been going by the map and opening
PG chapters, rather than by the later chapters), and when RPT returns to
Unk's line in "Ojo," he turns out to have come from the southern Munchkin
sub-kingdom of Seebania. By showing Cheeriobed as a northern Munchkin ruler,
RPT may have meant to suggest deliberately that there were two competing
claims for the title of Munchkin ruler, and that Ozma chose someone from the
northern royal line, not knowing that there was still anybody available from
the southern line to have considered. (I'm not suggesting that this
competition needs to have been as severe as to have involved a Civil War or
a War of the Roses conflict. The northern and southern lines could have had
competing claims for a long time, without actually going to war to support
their claims.) A point that remains undefined is whether the two lines
started out as one family that split up the territory or whether they were
always separate (either a competition older than the kingship, or the
development of a competing claim during a period of weakness in the older
line). But in supposing two sets of Munchkin kings, RPT was following the
situation that Baum had already established.
Ruth Berman

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 10:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Cheeriobed
David Hulan:
>I've always assumed that the mysterious missing Munchkin monarch
>referred to at the beginning of the book was Cheeriobed's father. The
>specific quote is "the blue Munchkin Country is governed by a king of
>whom nothing much has been heard for many a long year." In fact, in
>Chapter 20 Ozma says that the Wizard has been trying to locate
>Cheeriobed's father, but all his questions had "brought no change in
>the magic picture, showing that Mombi has utterly destroyed the good
>King of the Munchkins." So Cheeriobed's becoming King of the
>Munchkins was just a normal hereditary succession. (It seems
>impossible, however, that Cheeriobed's father was the monarch of the
>Munchkins who appeared in _Ozma_ and _Road_, since by that time Mombi
>had lost all her magic powers. That monarch must have been someone
>else.)
Not to mention that _Ojo_ tells how the King of Seebania gave up claims to
much of their territory because Ozma made her own choices as to Munchkin
rulers. I doubt she said, "Sorry, Seebanians, but you're all going to be
subject to some guy who's mysteriously disappeared." My guess is that Ozma
chose an interim monarch for the entire country (possibly Boq, as has been
suggested before, but maybe some local ruler instead), hoping to replace him
if the rightful ruler was found.
Nathan

From: "ruth berman" <berma005 at m...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 2:36 pm
Subject: Timing of Giant Horse in Oz
And digest that arrived today likewise has some interest substantial
comments on "Giant Horse" by J.L. Bell and Nathan DeHoff. Nathan raises the
problem of timing for "Giant Horse," in that having Tattypoo overthrow Mombi
20 [25] years earlier doesn't fit with having Mombi's overthrow take place
before the Wizard arrived in Oz, and asks what happened to the mysterious
Munchkin king from whom nothing had been heard for many a long year. Seems
to me this is indeed Cheeriobed, who has been shut up on the island group by
Quiberon. who disappeared mysteriously. As for the timing -- this is
something I've said before -- but Baum doesn't say that Mombi was overthrown
before the Wizard's arrival. It's a reasonable possibility from what does
get said, but not a necessity. I think at this point I'll paste in the full
set of comments I had for the Oz Research Group (distribution intended for
last April, but I don't remember if the mailing actually went out?) on the
subject:
[Spoiler Alert: assumes knowledge of the plot of "Giant Horse"]
In "Those Elusive Rulers of "Oz" Dunkiton Commentator #3), I commented on
the timing of the transformation of Orin into the Good Witch of the North in
terms of explaining how it could happen before the time of Wizard. A quick
recap: If Orin's claim that Mombi attacked her about 25 years earlier is
taken as almost precise, the 1928-published Giant Horse would be too late
for Orin to have been transformed before the 1900-published Wizard.
Furthermore, the presence of a Munchkin king mentioned as out and about in
Ozma and Road -- and not mentioned as asking Ozma for help in finding his
lost wife -- would seem to imply a date after Road for the kidnapping and
transformation of Orin and for the imprisonment of the Sapphire Islanders on
their island by Quiberon following Orin's disappearance. I argued that
"about" 25 years might well mean 28+ years, so dating Orin's transformation
to shortly before the time of Wizard, and that there might have been a
substantial lapse of time between Orin's disappearance and the appearance of
Quiberon. Mombi had lost her magic powers at the end of Land, but if the
spell that produced Quiberon was a slow-acting one, Quiberon might not have
imprisoned the Sapphire Islanders until after the time of Road. And,
likewise, although a request for help isn't mentioned in the text,
Cheeriobed might indeed have asked Ozma in that interim to try to find his
wife, and she might have tried and failed.
Of course, that line of argument assumes that the GWN of Wizard is the same
person as the GWN/Orin. If they're the same, then Orin's disappearance has
to be earlier than Wizard. If they're not the same, then Orin's
disappearance could just as well be later, shortly before the opening of
Land - although that sequence still leaves the problem of the Munchkin
king's freedom of movement in Ozma and Road. But a very slow-acting spell to
create Quiberon would work just as well for this case. As it happens, Dave
Hardenbrook, planning a story about the GWN (not so far published, but he's
discussed the details of his double-GWN idea on the Oz Digest), came up with
an explanation for having a double GWN: Mombi could have used a
switch-around spell, such as the one she used to exchange likenesses between
herself and Jellia in Land (Melody Grandy also used this spell to revive
Tip, as a character separate from Ozma, in her fine story The Disenchanted
Princess of Oz), to give Orin the appearance of the GWN. (He also assumes
that Mombi managed to put the now Orin-faced GWN out of the way magically in
a separate spell.)
This is an attractive argument, as it preserves the GWN as a separate
identify, instead of having her vanish into the conventional
beautiful-young-royalty figure of Orin (a plot device Thompson tended to
overuse). (The restoration of Tip in Melody Grandy's book and likewise in
Jack Snow's short story "Murder in Oz" plays on the same longing to keep the
character-as-first-met available.) Another advantage is that Orin's date of
about 25 years ago can be taken as essentially precise.
A disadvantage, though, is that a post-Wizard enchantment of Orin means
that there was a time when the GWN had Mombi mostly rendered harmless (as
described at the start of Land - although Mombi's supposed harmlessness left
her enough power for considerable mischief), and yet not so harmless as to
keep the GWN safe when Mombi rose up against her. A further disadvantage is
that -- getting rid of Thompson's account of how the GWN came to oust Mombi
from power without getting her entirely under control -- the double-GWN
arrangement restores the apparent discrepancy in Baum's version of a GWN who
rules the North (in Wizard), but seems to have been so easily fooled by
Mombi (in Land) as not to have noticed Mombi's continued magical evildoing.
So on the whole I prefer to accept Thompson's account of a single GWN. Some
secondary advantages: it makes the restored Orin a more interesting
person -- since she presumably is not just her royal self, but still has the
magical skills she had learned to use in the preceding years*); and it
provides a background to the GWN to explain her special friendship with the
Munchkins. (In Wizard, she shows up within minutes of the death of the
Wicked Witch of the East to see what is going on. Perhaps she had earlier
given the Munchkins some small talisman so that they could keep her
magically up-to-date on Munchkin events? She does not seem to have any such
arrangement to look after the Winkies.)
( * Ozma says at the end of Giant Horse that "Orin is no longer Good Witch
of the North," and the words could imply that Orin no longer has her skills
as a witch. But as Ozma goes on, "and the Gillikens" are without a
sovereign," and appoints Joe and Hyacinth to fill the opening, it would seem
that Ozma is thinking at that point of the GWN's political office, without
necessarily making any statement about her magical powers. If Jack Snow's
inclusion of the GWN (in Mimics -- the last reference to the GWN in the 40
Oz books) as among the guests at Ozana's welcome-party is taken as referring
to Orin, it suggests that Orin still has her witch-powers.)
Two comments by the Wizard, however, have been suggested as implying a
timing problem on the other side in accepting Orin's account of herself as
the (original) GWN. Gehan Cooray (on the Oz Digest) pointed to the Wizard's
account (in Wizard) of how he came to build the Emerald City and shut
himself up in the Palace: after describing the building of the Palace, he
says, "One of my greatest fears was the Witches.... There were four of
them.... Fortunately, the Witches of the North and South were good." Jumping
directly from the city-building to the presence of Good Witches could imply
that the Good Witches were already present and in power years earlier, when
the city-building began, but it doesn't have to. It could just as well be
meant as a chronological sequence, implying that the Wizard stayed shut up
even when the number of Wicked Witches went down to two at some time after
his arrival.
Then, when the Wizard returns to Oz (Dorothy/Wizard), there's a
conversation between Ozma and the Wizard (pointed out by Tyler Jones on the
Oz Digest). Ozma says, "Once upon a time four Witches leagued together to
depose the king.... The Witches divided up the kingdom, and ruled the four
parts of it until you came here." The Wizard replies, "But, at that time,
there were two Good Witches and two Wicked Witches ruling in the land," and
Ozma agrees, "Yes, because a good Witch had conquered Mombi in the North and
Glinda the Good had conquered the evil Witch in the South." Here, the Wizard
seems to say that the GWN had already conquered Mombi "at that time" (i.e.,
the time of his arrival) and to be correcting Ozma's mis-statement that the
four Wicked Witches ruled until after the Wizard's arrival. (And that
probably is the meaning Baum intended -- perhaps he was thinking that the
excitement of the Wizard's arrival distracted the Wicked Witches, and that
the distraction his arrival provided was what gave Glinda and the GWN their
chance to depose the two Wicked Witches.) But "that time" could also be read
as meaning the time of the Wizard's rule generally, in which case the
Wizard's comment is not to correct Ozma, but rather to agree with her that
the four Wickeds ruled until he arrived, and the two Goods took power at
some time after that, without specifying just when. So it seems to me that
Thompson's idea that the appearance of the GWN could have been fairly late
in the Wizard's reign is a reasonable interpretation.
And so, while recognizing the appeal of the double-GWN plan, I prefer the
simpler singleton GWN on Thompson's model. (Now, if I could only come up
with a plausible explanation of what kind of a connection there was -- if
any -- between the GWN and that other Good Witch who in earlier days also
lived in the North, the Flying Monkey's Gayelette....)
Ruth Berman

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Tue Nov 7, 2000 12:45 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Timing of Giant Horse in Oz
Ruth:
>I think at this point I'll paste in the full
>set of comments I had for the Oz Research Group (distribution intended for
>last April, but I don't remember if the mailing actually went out?) on the
>subject:
I haven't received a Research Group mailing in some time. Is it still
around? If so, who's in charge, and what's the copying policy? I might
want to contribute something for the next mailing, if I have time.
>[Spoiler Alert: assumes knowledge of the plot of "Giant Horse"]
This is still true, so I'll leave the alert.
> A disadvantage, though, is that a post-Wizard enchantment of Orin means
>that there was a time when the GWN had Mombi mostly rendered harmless (as
>described at the start of Land - although Mombi's supposed harmlessness
>left
>her enough power for considerable mischief), and yet not so harmless as to
>keep the GWN safe when Mombi rose up against her.
Besides, didn't Orin say that Mombi ruled the Gillikins when the marriage of
Cheeriobed and Orin was being planned? A possible explanation for this,
however, is that Mombi had control in some Gillikin territories, but not
others, and the claim that she ruled "the North" was an exaggeration. If
Mombi had actually ruled the entire Gillikin Country, it is unlikely that
Kinda Jolly would have given her a job (and under her actual name, for that
matter); he would have recognized her as the old witch whose vassal he once
was.
Incidentally, if Mombi was conquered late in the Wizard's reign, wouldn't
that mean that Tip was probably living with her at that point? There's
certainly no indication that Mombi took a boy with her when she fled her old
hut, but perhaps she kept him hidden, for fear that the GWN might have been
able to determine his true identity.
Nathan

From: Tyler Jones <tyler.jones at b...>
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 7:23 pm
Subject: RE: [Nonestica] Cheeriobed's name
Nathan
wrote:
> Actually, I think that someone (March Laumer, perhaps?) thought that
> the name meant "Cheery Obed."
It was indeed March Laumer who postulated that Cheeriobed was a shorted
form of "Cheery Obadiah", since that was the actual name of him and his
missing father (not so missing anymore, according to Laumer).
Tyler Jones

From: RMorris306 at a...
Date: Mon Nov 6, 2000 10:20 pm
Subject: Re: RE: [Nonestica] Cheeriobed's name
In a message dated 11/6/00 10:02:12 PM, tyler.jones at b... writes:
<< Nathan wrote:
> Actually, I think that someone (March Laumer, perhaps?) thought that
> the name meant "Cheery Obed."
It was indeed March Laumer who postulated that Cheeriobed was a shorted
form of "Cheery Obadiah", since that was the actual name of him and his
missing father (not so missing anymore, according to Laumer).
>>
Another possible inspiration might be the Cheeryble family in Charles
Dickens' NICHOLAS NICKLEBY: two elderly brothers and a younger nephew(?) who
ends up marrying the sister of the title character. Definite "good guys,"
just like Thompson's Cheeriobed and his family.
Rich

From: RMorris306 at a...
Date: Tue Nov 7, 2000 12:01 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] GIANT HORSE politics
In a message dated 11/5/00 7:17:40 PM, JnoLBell at c... writes:
<< I'm away from home, so I can't provide my usual citation [general
applause], but I'll add a coupla comments on GIANT HORSE issues folks have
raised.
++++++++++++++ SPOILERS ++++++++++++++++++
I've always thought Ozma's choice of Joe King and Hyacinth to lead the
Gillikins was odd, trying to tie off a loose end that wasn't loose. This
time around it seemed even more odd because their kingdom is clearly (a)
very difficult to reach, and (b) one of those regions of Oz where some
normal physical rules don't apply, as when the storms blow up. In other
words, it seems as much like the town of shutters as like Ozure Isles or
other normative kingdoms--an odd choice to be the center of Gillikin
government.
Furthermore, the text of GIANT HORSE hints at another historic locus of
political power in the North. Orin is said to be the daughter of (as I
recall this morning) "King Gil of Gilkenny." As with the past rulers of Oz
having the syllable "Oz" in their name, the names Gil and Gilkenny seem to
be connected to authority over the larger region. Perhaps Gilkenny at one
point dominated the whole north. Perhaps Gil's family was simply making a
claim for that authority. In any event, the Gilkenny dynasty seems like a
better place to look for a ruler of the Gillikins.
But perhaps these problems are actually related. If the Gilkenny dynasty
has come down to Orin (and indeed she has governed the North as Tattypoo),
that means there's a very real possibility of Philador having a claim to
rule both Munchkinland and the Gillikins. That would be a power base to
rival Ozma's. She might have moved quickly while she had Cheeriobed's
gratitude, establishing another family as rulers of the North--a family
whose isolation would make them little more than ceremonial monarchs. In
sum, Ozma's unfathomable appointments may have been a savvy way of
consolidating her power.
>>
On the other hand, if Ozma were really that manipulative and
power-driven, wouldn't she have gone ahead and named Cheeriobed's family
rulers of both the Gillikins and the Munchkins...and then taken Philador as
her own consort, thus insuring that her own heirs would have virtually
undisputed claims to rule over half of Oz? (And, at that, almost no
competition...given that neither of the other two countries' rulers, the
mechanized Nick Chopper and the seeming confirmed spinster Glinda, would be
likely to produce heirs of their own...to eventually claiming sole rule of
all of Oz, a la Skamperoo?) It's a frightening thought, but I really don't
see Ozma that way, and I very much doubt most of the rest of us...and
certainly NOT Baum or Thompson...do, either.
Rich

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Tue Nov 7, 2000 10:31 am
Subject: Rulers
Ruth:
>Your suggestion for counting
>human rulers of Oz sub-kingdoms -- maybe counting rulers in general would be
>more useful. For the specific task of considering what rulers Ozma might
>pick when wanting to fill a vacancy for territorial ruler, there's no
>special reason why the one picked has to be human (and Nick Chopper and
>Glinda might both in different ways be considered non-humans). Since
>apparently the majority, and certainly a plurality, of the inhabitants are
>human, there'd be political advantages to choosing humans, but it's probably
>not an absolute necessity?
Not an absolute necessity, but most of the non-human rulers we see
seem to be exceedingly parochial in their interests, even more so
than Pompus or Kinda Jolly. It's less that they might not be fit and
more that they seem unlikely to be interested. In the Gillikin
Country specifically (since that's the only one that seems to be in
need of a newly-appointed ruler at any point in the FF, given that
Cheeriobed is the hereditary ruler of the Munchkins) we have Lady
Aurex of the Skeezers, Ozwoz, Kinda Jolly, Pompus, Nandywog, Joe
King, and Randy among the more-or-less beneficent and human rulers,
at least going by he map that covers the FF. I suppose one could also
count the Adepts, who IIRC took over the ruling of the Flatheads. Of
that lot I suppose one could make a pretty good case for Joe as the
best choice for overall ruler, with the Adepts as the only fairly
plausible alternative if they'd be interested. But their home ground
is in a far corner of the country, as is Regalia, whereas Uptown
seems to be quite central if rather difficult of access.
Of course, if one wants to be non-speciesist, Gugu might be the best
choice; he's demonstrated that he's a wise and competent ruler, his
home ground is fairly central, and if asked he might even be
willing...
Tyler
>Nathan wrote:
> > Did Cheeriobed ever rule anything outside the Ozure Isles themselves?
>
>By combining the events in _Giant Horse_ with those in Ojo, I've always
>believed
>that ancient Munchkinland, much like Gaul, was usually divided into three
>parts,
>although I can't remember that famous latin phrase...
"Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres."
> Cheeriobed's family
>ruled
>in the north, Ojo' family ruled in the south, and the WWE ruled in the
>center.
I agree with that assessment.
Jeremy:
>Cheeriobed:
>A serious question here (at least, I mean it as one)--did
>the breakfast cereal Cheerios exist at the time this was
>written?
No. The breakfast cereal now known as Cheerios may have been around
that far back, but until 1950, give or take a couple of years, it was
known as Cheerioats. I remember that from when I was a kid.
>I mean it, while that sounds Jeremyishly flippant, it would
>help explain where RPT got the name (unless it's from the
>British goodbye).
Not entirely British. One of the _archy and mehitabel_ poems, for
instance, is "cheerio my deario," and don marquis was entirely
American (and flourished at about the time GH was written).
Nathan:
>Not to mention that _Ojo_ tells how the King of Seebania gave up claims to
>much of their territory because Ozma made her own choices as to Munchkin
>rulers. I doubt she said, "Sorry, Seebanians, but you're all going to be
>subject to some guy who's mysteriously disappeared." My guess is that Ozma
>chose an interim monarch for the entire country (possibly Boq, as has been
>suggested before, but maybe some local ruler instead), hoping to replace him
>if the rightful ruler was found.
Good point. I agree.
>Besides, didn't Orin say that Mombi ruled the Gillikins when the marriage of
>Cheeriobed and Orin was being planned? A possible explanation for this,
>however, is that Mombi had control in some Gillikin territories, but not
>others, and the claim that she ruled "the North" was an exaggeration. If
>Mombi had actually ruled the entire Gillikin Country, it is unlikely that
>Kinda Jolly would have given her a job (and under her actual name, for that
>matter); he would have recognized her as the old witch whose vassal he once
>was.
In the context of the entire FF, it seems highly unlikely that any of
the wicked witches ruled the entirety of their quadrant. They
probably just ruled the parts that were in closest contact with the
EC, which is why the Wizard thought they ruled the entire quadrant.
There doesn't seem to be any sign that Mombi ruled Kimbaloo or
Pumperdink or Regalia or the Skeezer/Flathead country, or even
Uptown, which the map (and logic) puts pretty close to where she
lived with Tip and also to the cottage that Tattypoo took over from
her. Similarly, the WWE doesn't seem to have ruled Seebania or Mudge
or Halidom and Troth or the Ozure Islands or Keretaria, and the WWW
doesn't seem to have ruled Herku or Thi or the Maybe Mountains or
Gloma's realm or Oogaboo or Corumbia, Corabia, and Samandra, just to
mention some of the places that seem to have had continuous ruling
dynasties of their own through the period of the WWs putative rule.
(Well, the ruling lines of Corumbia and Corabia were under
enchantments, but Samandra was still there.)
David Hulan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Wed Nov 8, 2000 12:08 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Rulers
David Hulan:
>In the Gillikin
>Country specifically (since that's the only one that seems to be in
>need of a newly-appointed ruler at any point in the FF, given that
>Cheeriobed is the hereditary ruler of the Munchkins) we have Lady
>Aurex of the Skeezers, Ozwoz
Does Ozwoz really rule anything? In _Purple Prince_, he lives alone (not
counting his wooden automatons), so he probably wouldn't have had the desire
to rule even a small territory, let alone the entire Gillikin Country.
Besides, he probably wanted to keep a low profile, lest Ozma outlaw
wozardry.
>Kinda Jolly
I'm not sure how qualified he would have been for ruling the Gillikins. His
kingdom was small, and his subjects well-behaved, so trying to keep order
among the wild Gillikin tribes would probably not have been something to
which he would have volunteered.
>Pompus, Nandywog, Joe
>King, and Randy among the more-or-less beneficent and human rulers,
>at least going by he map that covers the FF.
Well, Randy was still a Prince at the time of _Giant Horse_, so, if a
Regalian ruler had been selected to govern the Gillikins, it probably would
have been Randy's father.
Nathan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Wed Nov 8, 2000 11:55 am
Subject: GIANT HORSE politics
Rich Morrissey wrote:
<<if Ozma were really that manipulative and power-driven, wouldn't she have
gone ahead and named Cheeriobed's family rulers of both the Gillikins and
the Munchkins...and then taken Philador as her own consort, thus insuring
that her own heirs would have virtually undisputed claims to rule over half
of Oz?>>
I don't think it's a question of Ozma being power-driven. Rather, she
consistently shows a strong desire to preserve the political stability of
Oz, taking it as her duty to rule the land that way. She acts unilaterally
in ways that affect probably thousands of her subjects at a time; that may
not be manipulative in the sense of secretly using people's desires to
steer them in certain directions, but it's certainly a form of control.
At the end of GIANT HORSE, we're faced with one such unilateral act which
is difficult to explain. Ozma elevates Joe King and Queen Hyacinth to rule
over all of the Gillikins. She doesn't consult any of those subjects. She
doesn't even consult Joe and Hyacinth, who will hear the news from High Boy
[279-80]. Indeed, there's no sign that she's already met the Upland rulers
or even heard about their kingdom. So why does Ozma grant them authority
over the whole Gillikin Country? One explanation is that she's carried away
in the excitement of making Cheeriobed king of the Munchkins, and seizes on
the most recent nice Gillikin rulers she's heard of. That's not a picture
of an intelligent monarch.
Rather, I think we have to seek an explanation in Ozma's political program
of stability and peace. Thompson adopts that outlook in describing the
danger that the north faces: "without a ruler, the Gillikin Country was
open to war and invasion by hostile tribes" [156]. Now I'm not sure that
view stands up to scrutiny. For one thing, if the Gillikin Country includes
the whole north, it's unclear where those hostile tribes can invade from.
We already know that wars can break out there (GLINDA), that large portions
are wild (MAGIC), that illegal magicians abound (GLINDA, GNOME KING). How
much was Tattypoo really able to accomplish by "settling disputes between
its small kingdoms" [106]? How well can Joe and Hyacinth patrol the corners
of the Gillikin Country from their remote central kingdom? The Gillikin
monarchy seems almost symbolic, a way for the people of the north's
civilized regions who acknowledge Ozma's rule to feel secure and on par
with the people of the other three quadrants of Oz.
As for taking Philador as a consort, Ozma might well see several problems
with that possibility. First is her reluctance to marry, which she'll
restate in JACK PUMPKINHEAD. Second is the traditional worry of queens
(e.g., Elizabeth I) that they'll lose personal authority if they take
husbands; that probably wouldn't apply in Baum's Oz, but might in
Thompson's. Third is the fact that heirs are far less important in a
country of immortals than the concentration of power among living
relatives.
Fourth and most important, if Ozma made a marital alliance with the heir to
the Munchkin and Gillikin nations, the Winkies and Quadlings might perceive
that as favoritism. Ozma's ruling method seems to be treating almost every
subject with equal beneficence while restricting their freedoms to do magic
and own property. She might well see elevating one nation above others as
creating unfairness and therefore instability. Instead, GIANT HORSE ends
with each of the four quadrants having an independent royal structure, all
the rulers on good terms with each other, all but Glinda weaker than and
dependent on Ozma.
David Hulan wrote:
<<Gugu might be the best choice; he's demonstrated that he's a wise and
competent ruler, his home ground is fairly central, and if asked he might
even be willing.>>
I think Baum's portrayals of the wild parts of Oz imply that the law there
differs significantly from the law for people. "There are laws in the
forests," MAGIC says, "as well as in every other place, and these laws are
made by the beasts themselves, and are necessary to keep them from fighting
and tearing one another to pieces." While that's the same goal of stability
as I suggest Ozma has, it's at a much lower level. No worry about property,
sustenance, or relative power, just fighting. I doubt human Gillikins would
feel safe under those rules, as fairly and wisely as Gugu would administer
them. Furthermore, "so fierce is the nature of some beasts that they will
at times fight in spite of laws and punishment."
Another question is how much allegiance Gugu feels toward Ozma. Early in
MAGIC he says, "The people of Oz have not been our friends; they have not
been our enemies. They have let us alone, and we have let them alone." At
the end he tells Dorothy and the Wizard, "I know now that you are the
friends of beasts and that the forest people may trust you. Whenever the
Wizard of Oz and Princess Dorothy enter the Forest of Gugu hearafter, they
will be as welcome and as safe with us as ever they are in the Emerald
City." But that's not an acknowledgment of Ozma's rule. It's more like one
independent ruler acknowledging friendships.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Thu Nov 9, 2000 11:25 am
Subject: GIANT HORSE Politics
J.L.:
While your objections to Ozma's taking Philador as a consort are
quite valid, you left out the fact that he's ten years old and likes
being that age; ten-year-old boys may serve adequately as kings, but
they don't make appropriate consorts for teen-age queens.
And my suggestion that Gugu might be the best choice for Gillikin
ruler was made with tongue far in cheek. :-)
David Hulan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Fri Nov 10, 2000 8:48 am
Subject: GIANT HORSE politics
David Hulan wrote:
<<While your objections to Ozma's taking Philador as a consort are
quite valid, you left out the fact that he's ten years old and likes
being that age; ten-year-old boys may serve adequately as kings, but
they don't make appropriate consorts for teen-age queens.>>
True, though that didn't stop George Lucas from making PHANTOM MENACE the
way he did. [Would that something had.]
In the extremely unlikely event that Ozma were to decide to marry Philador,
she has an example of how to do so from Gayelette in WIZARD:
"She found a boy who was handsome and manly and wise beyond his
years. Gayelette made up her mind that when he grew to be a man she would
make him her husband, so she took him to her ruby palace and used all her
magic powers to make him as strong and good and lovely as any woman could
wish. When he grew to manhood, Quelala, as he was called, was said to be
the best and wisest man in all the land, while his manly beauty was so
great that Gayelette loved him dearly, and hastened to make everything
ready for the wedding."

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Fri Nov 10, 2000 8:48 am
Subject: GIANT HORSE timing
Ken Shepherd wrote:
<<The text of GIANT HORSE compresses the action into a very small
amount of time, and the characters do a lot of traveling.>>
Traveling certainly seems easier when one has a giant horse. The heroes'
visit to the Shutter Faces' city might be the fastest trip through any
hostile enclosed community in the history of irrelevant episodes [218-21].
The inhabitants don't even have time to make threats, so the travelers have
to infer them: "they would have insisted on us growing shutters,
too!" says Benny.
I, too, was puzzled by how Akbad could fly to the Emerald City in nine
hours and return in five while bearing a massive stone statue, as well as a
girl and a Scarecrow [79]. There are other mysteries to his wings as well.
At first they seem to obey his spoken order like the Magic Umbrella [42],
but about nine hours later Akbad can divert them from his stated destination
in order to frighten Benny and the Scarecrow [75]. Later they won't
carry him off the Ozure Isles until he stops thinking only of himself [235].
They seem to be neither fully under his control nor fully autonomous.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Tue Nov 14, 2000 11:08 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE horse sense
High Boy has heard of the Sawhorse, and "wants to see whether he is as
handsome and as useful as I am" [161]. When he does meet Ozma's steed,
"High Boy secretly thought him a poor looking creature, but as he
wisely kept this thought to himself they got along famously"
[275-7].
What would be the result of a race between the wooden horse and the giant
horse? I suspect the terrain and duration would be crucial. In a
steeplechase I'd bet on High Boy. For an endurance race, even over
mountains, I suspect the Sawhorse could go a lot longer without stopping
for yummy jummy.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Wed Nov 15, 2000 6:34 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE art
Neill and Reilly & Lee seem to have liked the design of GNOME KING since they used it again in
GIANT HORSE. [Unfortunately, I doubt the design survived the
transition to the Del Rey reprint in good shape; all page numbers
below refer to the original edition.] Each chapter starts with a drawing
extending over about a page and a half. This is a compositional challenge.
Akbad's wings are well suited for it[78-9, 96-7]. In fact, Akbad shows
up on a chapter opener even when he doesn't appear in the chapter [104-5]!
When the format works for Neill, he uses it to enhance other aspects
of his drawings, such as the contrast of light and dark [78-9, 256-7]
and symmetry within the asymmetric frame [228-9]. At other places,
however, Neill seems to be hampered by the space, not knowing what to
do with it [130-1] or letting it throw off his scale [114-5, 216-7].
Benny seems to be a particular problem. Such a solid character should
be rooted to the ground, but he's often left floating above the text
[162-3, 188-9, 200-1].
The rest of the drawings in GIANT HORSE are either full-page or a standard size that
leaves room for ten text lines, again as in GNOME KING. The two
exceptions I saw were on pages 54 and 191, and Neill may have originally
drawn those pictures the same way as the rest. Once again, he was
using a variety of shadings provided by his printers. (See some of the earliest
Nonestica messages for a discussion of this process.) One challenge of
the GIANT HORSE design is that every chapter must conclude on a
right-hand page so that a full spread can follow. In contrast to GNOME
KING, the Reilly & Lee layout people didn't achieve that by shifting
a lot of drawings to odd places in the text. In fact, only three stand
out: on page 76 (should be near page 179), page 187 (should be near page
195), and page 215 (purely decorative, it seems). It's possible, but not
necessary, that the picture on page 39 shows Philador outside Tattypoo's
cottage.
Instead, Neill seems to have supplied many full-page "portrait"
illustrations that could appear almost anywhere. GIANT HORSE is, I believe,
the first Oz book to have captions on many of its black and white pictures:
"This is Trot" [65], "'Hush,' Warned the Scarecrow"
[169]. I recall that a typo in the frontispiece caption is one sign of
a GIANT HORSE first state.
For those portraits, it seems likely that Neill adapted drawings of
pretty girls he was doing for other jobs. Thus, we see Orin early [43], two
images of Hyacinth in quick succession [150, 152], and Dorothy as a
flapper, or perhaps as Trot [36].
Some further comments on specific GIANT HORSE drawings--
endpapers: Was this image, which seems to includes Pon and several Emerald
City celebrities who don't appear in GIANT HORSE, borrowed from SCARECROW
or some advertising associated with it?
"This Book Belongs to..." page: I find the image of High Boy as a
book or attache case rather awkward. Maybe if those things weren't
often covered in leather (i.e., animal hides), I'd have a better
feeling about it.
copyright page and author's note: This cat playing with the Wizard's hat
and wishing pills has no connection with the story, but they're nice images.
18: This picture seems to have been drawn or printed backwards. Look at the Z's.
32-3: Can we identify all of Cheeriobed's advisors? Obviously, Akbad is on
the right. Toddledy is the man who's pushed his spectacles up onto his
forehead [34]. Others should include Umtillio the musician and Palumbo the
juggler.
51: Has there been a picture of a car in an Oz book before?
124: This image of Mombi reminds me of the wood-chipper scene in FARGO.
159: Who are the three people awaiting High Boy? Though the best textual
answer is Herby, Joe King, and Philador, the sketchy figures appear to
include the Scarecrow and Trot.
176-7: A highly dramatic image of Orpah rescuing Trot.
251: Jack Pumpkinhead and Omby Amby appear at the bottom of this picture,
but they weren't among the Ozians who traveled to Sapphire City [248].
266-7: You'd think a merman would have to ride a horse side-saddle, but no.
271: There seem to be two women with tall crowns in the back of this
procession. I'd assume one was Glinda, except that she isn't mentioned in
the chapter. And perhaps the smaller one's crown is actually the hat of
someone behind her. Also, the Cowardly Lion's wearing glasses again, as he
does periodically.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Thu Nov 16, 2000 10:54 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE plan
Folks have wondered about whether Thompson's decision to disenchant
Tattypoo was improvised or planned. I leaned strongly toward the latter,
for a number of reasons.
Thompson leaves clues throughout her story about exactly where
she's heading. Most of the time she begins a book in the middle of a
crisis, with a tyrant blowing his top or a servant running around
hysterically. GIANT HORSE is unusual in starting with a long history of the
Ozure Isles and their lost queen. Not until page 23 do we have the
traditional explosion of temper from a villain, in this case Quiberon. In
the midst of that crisis, Philador make explicit another goal: "Surely
she [Tattypoo] will help me find my mother and destroy Quiberon before
he destroys us." Thompson's opening tells us clearly the main
problems to be solved in this novel.
Along the way, more arrows point ahead toward the happy ending.
Philador dreams of "his royal mother" in the Good Witch's cottage
[115]. He thinks of her again when he meets Hyacinth [151]. As for
that witch, Agnes associates Tattypoo with a grand palace [106]. The
only conflict in her life, Thompson indicates, is her inability to
remember "the days before she had come to the purple forest" [109].
In other words, immediately after re-introducing us to the Good Witch,
Thompson is clearly preparing to take her away.
As a result of this plan for the book, Thompson produces a novel that's
rather tightly structured for her. Every episode but Benny's animation
and arrival in Oz is triggered by the crisis in chapter 1. All the
villainy, from Orin's enchantment to Cheeriobed's father's disappearance
to Herby's bottling, goes back to Mombi. She's clearly planned certain
moments, like the parallel departures of Philador and Akbad from the
Ozure Isles on the same night [41-2].
Even the irrelevant episodes are muted. As people have pointed out,
Philador doesn't run into any diversions on his way to Tattypoo's cottage,
or from there to Upland. He does meet the Shutter Faces on his way to the
Emerald City, but that trouble passes so easily that Trot has to plan to
come back for more: "I'm going to bring Dorothy and Betsy back here
some day and see what they do to us" [221]. Orin doesn't
encounter any trouble on her way to the Ozure Isles, not even finding
a man ignorant enough to row her across Lake Orizon [261, 235]. That
leaves Benny, the Scarecrow, and Trot to suffer the usual indignities
from small communities: "Everyone wishes to make us into a being
like himself," Benny observes [199].
Yet another indication that Thompson had more than her usual plan
for GIANT HORSE is that she seems to have gone back to review WIZARD. The
Scarecrow retells events from that book [68-70], as does the narrator [107].
Thompson gives Tattypoo a magical slate, as the witch used in WIZARD [117].
One nice result of that research is that the Winkies are back in the west
of Oz [18] even though Thompson's previous four (plus?) books had placed
them in the east. (Thompson doesn't seem to have read LAND for more information
on Mombi, however; she seems to have relied on her memory of research
done for LOST KING. Thus, she describes the conflict between Mombi and
the Good Witch of the North but leaves out Glinda's role in conquering
Mombi in LAND [107-10]. She also misremembers that the Scarecrow
became Emperor of Oz [70, 183], rather than king of the Emerald City.
But Thompson does recount the story of SKY ISLAND [202], indicating
she did a little research on Trot
before using her in this book. )
Of course, Thompson's rereading of WIZARD meant she has to explain
why the Ozurians aren't like the short Munchkins we first met. She tells us
the 1,007 islanders are "a tall fair haired race of Munchkins"
[20]-der Ubermunchkin!

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:06 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] GIANT HORSE plan
J. L. Bell:
>Folks have wondered about whether Thompson's decision to disenchant
>Tattypoo was improvised or planned. I leaned strongly toward the
latter, >for a number of reasons.
Most of the clues you give assume that Thompson wrote the book straight
through from the beginning to the end. While this has been described as her
typical method (see, for instance, Dorothy Maryott's essay in the Oz Club's
printing of _Silver Princess_), it is certainly possible that she planned out
some ideas for a story before actually sitting down to write it, and she might
have planned another adventure for the GWN before incorporating this idea into
_Giant Horse_. Who knows?
> As a result of this plan for the book, Thompson produces a novel
>that's rather tightly structured for her. Every episode but Benny's
>animation and arrival in Oz is triggered by the crisis in chapter 1.
All >the villainy, from Orin's enchantment to Cheeriobed's father's
>disappearance to Herby's bottling, goes back to Mombi. She's clearly
>planned certain moments, like the parallel departures of Philador and
Akbad >from the Ozure Isles on the same night [41-2].
I thought that the number of characters who feature as focal points was
interesting, and somewhat unusual for Thompson. It usually seems like, as
soon as she has established the main adventuring party, she focuses almost
entirely on them, with maybe an occasional chapter telling how things are for
less significant characters. In this book, however, we see several characters
who are used as focal points for a while, but are not major adventurers, most
notably Akbad, Cheeriobed, and Tattypoo (although I would have liked to see a
bit more of Orin's journey to the Ozure Isles).
Thompson also lets us see events first-hand that might have been only
described by the characters themselves if she had kept up the model of her
previous books. For instance, like _Kabumpo_ and _Grampa_, _Giant Horse_
features a kingdom in peril. The Ozure Isles are paid much closer attention
than are Pumperdink and Ragbad, however; Pumperdink is never visited after
Kabumpo and Pompadore leave (within the text of _Kabumpo_, that is), and Ragbad
only reappears toward the end of _Grampa_. There's also the matter of Benny's
coming to life. His transportation to Oz was abrupt and poorly executed, but we
did get a first-hand glimpse at his animation. Contrast this with Bill in
_Grampa_, whose coming-to-life was described by the character himself after the
fact.
Nathan

From: Ozmama at a...
Date: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:19 pm
Subject: Re: Giant Horse Plan
Nathan:<<
I thought that the number of characters who feature as focal points was
interesting, and somewhat unusual for Thompson. It usually seems like, as
soon as she has established the main adventuring party, she focuses almost
entirely on them, with maybe an occasional chapter telling how things are
for less significant characters. In this book, however, we see several
characters who are used as focal points for a while, but are not major
adventurers, most notably Akbad, Cheeriobed, and Tattypoo (although I would
have liked to see a bit more of Orin's journey to the Ozure Isles).
Thompson also lets us see events first-hand that might have been only
described by the characters themselves if she had kept up the model of her
previous books. For instance, like _Kabumpo_ and _Grampa_, _Giant Horse_
features a kingdom in peril. The Ozure Isles are paid much closer attention
than are Pumperdink and Ragbad, however; Pumperdink is never visited after
Kabumpo and Pompadore leave (within the text of _Kabumpo_, that is), and
Ragbad only reappears toward the end of _Grampa_. There's also the matter
of Benny's coming to life. His transportation to Oz was abrupt and poorly
executed, but we did get a first-hand glimpse at his animation. Contrast
this with Bill in _Grampa_, whose coming-to-life was described by the
character himself after the fact.>>
It occurs to me that RPT may have blocked out another book rather than Oz
and then revamped it for the series. Her opening lines are among the most
lyric in the canon and not at all her usually flippant Ozzy tone. And, as has
been pointed out already, _Giant Horse_ is tightly written. I can see where
she might have written something single-plotted without the Oz elements,
since the heart of the story really does stem from the Ozure Isles material.
If we excise Trot, Benny, and the Scarecrow, there's still a pretty good story
left for us. A young prince could easily have had the adventures behind
Quiberon's cave while on his quest. This quest--although still having ie's--
might well lead to something other than a typical Thompson romp. Dunno.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:35 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE: Benny
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Benny's...transportation to Oz was abrupt and poorly executed, but
we did get a first-hand glimpse at his animation. Contrast this with
Bill in _Grampa_, whose coming-to-life was described by the character
himself after the fact.>>
Benny marks the third inanimate object Thompson brings to life in America
and then brings to Oz. [At least that's the sequence of events Bill recalls.]
That matches how many American humans she's brought to Oz so far. Of
those objects brought to life, I find Benny the most interesting because of
the contradiction between his big, hard, solid physical presence and his childlike
naivete and uncertainty. That, and his sideburns.
Thompson clearly wants Benny to provide a LESSON for her readers
about accepting what makes one special. Through most of the book he talks
about becoming a real person despite the Scarecrow's warnings that it's not
all it's cracked up to be [57, 60, 72]. (The Scarecrow even invokes personal
experience on this point: "I was once a real person and did not care
for it" [274]. That seems to be an allusion to his prior life as Chang
Wang Woe.) Naturally, Benny has to suffer through three communities who
seem to want to change him into one of them [199] and, like Dorothy's companions
in WIZARD, prove his worth to readers, if not to himself [181, 184]. Finally
Trot persuades him to stay a granite statue, and to stay in Oz [275].
Benny's history might give us some clues about the Scarecrow's
earliest moments, which we've discussed at some length. The stone man
describes memories of his existence as a statue before he was brought to
life. "While I could neither move nor talk I could see and hear all
that went on about me," he says [57]. His detailed recollections
include suffering from the elements [47], watching people use
umbrellas [48], hearing himself referred to as a Public Benefactor
[58], and having birds perch on his head [61]. He might even remember
being "quarried,...hacked and hewn into my present shape"
[57], though those could also be deductions from seeing what his
sculptor did with other stones. (Similarly, in LOST KING Humpy has
memories of movie roles from before Dorothy wishes him to life.)
In any event, this background implies that objects--or at least
those in humanoid form--can sense what's happening around them even before
they achieve motor powers and speech. "Being brought to life," at
least in Thompson's books, doesn't mean achieving consciousness or
thought. Rather, it means achieving the ability to voice one's
thoughts and to act for one's wishes. That makes it easier to
reconcile the Scarecrow's story of his creation in WIZARD with its
modification in ROYAL BOOK. He indeed sensed the world as soon his
eyes and ears were painted, as the first book says. But he didn't then
have the ability to speak or move. Those powers of life entered into
his body when he touched that bean pole and took in the spirit of
Chang Wang Woe. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been able to speak to Dorothy
and walk to the Emerald City.
That in turn implies that all statues, scarecrows, tackling
dummies, mannequins, Big Boy signs, and other things in the shape of people
are in fact sensing events around them. And that rule holds not only in Oz,
but in Thompson's America. So when Peter floated past the figure of William
Penn atop Philadelphia's city hall in GNOME KING, the statue presumably
wondered what was up.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:35 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE plan
Jeremy Steadman wrote:
<<Or the clues could have been inserted after she knew where she was
going. (On the other hand, this is RPT we're talking about here, so
perhaps not.)>>
Indeed, GIANT HORSE isn't tight or consistent compared to the work of
authors who made a habit of careful planning and revision. But measured
against Thompson's usual novels, it seems to be strongly designed. The
clues about where the book is going aren't just little details that would
be easy to insert, like establishing Tattypoo's name in chapter 1 [18].
Rather, they're significant shifts from the way Thompson usually tells her
stories.
In addition to the differences I listed, Nathan DeHoff notes that
the narrative regularly returns to the Ozure Isles. Benny's plot might
start with no connection to that kingdom, but in a coupla chapters he's
there. Of all the travelers in the book, only Herby and High Boy aren't
trying to escape or return to Lake Orizon, and the medicine man is linked
to the Ozurians because he's another victim of Mombi. (It's ironic, then,
that the book was named after High Boy; am I right in recalling this title
was a big challenge for Thompson and Reilly & Lee?)
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<I thought that the number of characters who feature as focal points
was interesting, and somewhat unusual for Thompson. It usually seems
like, as soon as she has established the main adventuring party, she
focuses almost entirely on them, with maybe an occasional chapter
telling how things are for less significant characters. In this book,
however, we see several characters who are used as focal points for a
while, but are not major adventurers, most notably Akbad, Cheeriobed,
and Tattypoo (although I would have liked to see a bit more of Orin's
journey to the Ozure Isles).>>
Indeed, it takes a while for her to get us out of Cheeriobed's head and
into Philador's, and even then we frequently go back to what the king is
thinking. I think that's another clue that Thompson all along knew that
Cheeriobed's experiences (as well as Philador's, Akbad's, and Trot's) were
important in the story she wanted to tell. If she were simply following one
group of travelers and letting her immediate inspiration dictate what happened
next, there would be little reason to update us on events elsewhere.
I suspect the impediment to showing us more of Tattypoo's
adventures after her disenchantment is that we readers wouldn't experience
the discovery of who she really is at the same time that her husband does--i.e.,
at the peak emotional moment. In pithier terms, it would ruin the
surprise.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:35 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE politics
One wrinkle in my earlier remarks about King Gil of Gilkenny being a
potential ruler of the Gillikins: On page 261, Orin reports that "Agnes
turned out to be my maid-in-waiting,...and when she jumped after me she
also was restored to her own shape and immediately set off for my father's
castle, to tell him the good news."
Orin and Agnes seem confident that King Gil is probably still alive
and ruling. That means they received no news to the contrary while the Good
Witch of the North was overseeing the north. But we never hear more about
Agnes or Gilkenny in this book.

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Sun Nov 19, 2000 7:11 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] GIANT HORSE: Benny
J. L. Bell:
>Through most of the book he talks
>about becoming a real person despite the Scarecrow's warnings that it's not
>all it's cracked up to be [57, 60, 72]. (The Scarecrow even invokes
>personal experience on this point: "I was once a real person and did not
>care for it" [274]. That seems to be an allusion to his prior life as Chang
>Wang Woe.)
The problem with this is that he never really remembers being Chang Wang
Woe, so he wouldn't know whether he cared for it or not. It seems to me
like this line would have been more appropriately spoken by the Tin Woodman,
who would recall his life as a meat person.
Nathan

From: "ruth berman" <berma005 at m...>
Date: Mon Nov 20, 2000 5:22 pm
Subject: giant illos in oz
J.L. Bell: Interesting set of comments on the "Giant Horse" illos. I think
you're right that the page-and-a-top-half format for the chapter headings
works spectacularly well for some of the illos, but gets in the way for
some. The endpapers -- Pon isn't in the endpaper design. If you're looking
at a line-up of people including Pon parading along with hands on shoulders
of the person in front, that's the endpaper design from "Scarecrow." Sounds
as if your edition had that stuck in arbitrarily. The actual endpaper design
for "Giant Horse" doesn't show anyone specific to the book, but is rather a
general portrait of favorite Oz characters running along bowling hoops (the
hoops in the O with a Z in it shape Neill liked). The non-textual cat on the
copyright page playing with the Wizard's hat -- Neill fairly often liked to
stick in non-textual little animals observing events. The portrait of Trot
has a large frog (toad?) staring stolidly at her. An effective comic device.
Cheeriobed's advisors -- I don't think there's any way to decide whether the
baldheaded guy and pageboy bobbed guy are Umtillio and Palumbo or the other
way round. I wonder if the extra guy in specs was going to be Toddledy until
he decided to put in Toddledy with his specs pushed up on his forehead. But
if he's meant to be someone, about the only person he can be is Jewlia's
father, the court jeweler, although in the text he's only mentioned, not
seen. (I suppose his name is Jewelius.) First picture of a car in an Oz
book -- yes, I suppose so, although Denslow had the Scarecrow and the Tinman
driving about recklessly in a turn-of-the-century car in his picture book
about them. The three people awaiting High Boy -- the little one does look
more like Trot than Philador, but it's so sketchy that it could be either,
and the one you thought was more like the Scarecrow than Herby seems to me
too sketchy to look particularly like either one more than the other. The
figure with a top-knot and arm raised to wave High Boy on pretty well has to
be Joe King, as you suggest.
The color plates in this book are much more colorful than the ones in the
book the year before, "Gnome King." Either R&L got rid of the colorist whose
idea of Peter was a solid lump of green, or the colorist got to be much more
bold and confident. Philador, like Peter, is colored all in green, but there
are subtle yellow highlights and blue shadowings to give variety to the
outfit. (And why green when he's a Munchkin from the Ozure Isles, you may
ask? Well, maybe it was an old suit and had discolored. Attractive, though.)
In many plates, the shadings are quite bold, especially in the different
colors marking off light and shadow, for instance, on Akbad's wings, or the
merman's scales, or marking off the segmentation of High Boy's legs. Irene
Fisher, in her article on Neill's art in the "Bugle" a good many years back,
doesn't seem to have cared for the bold colors being used in this volume
(she referred to them as "garish"), but I like them a lot. Ones of Akbad and
of the merman are especially effective. About half of the color plates are
similar in subject and pose to full-page b&w drawings appearing elsewhere in
the book -- I think Neill may already have been hearing murmurs that R&L
might want to stop running the color plates (or maybe what he was hearing
was that they might cut the number from 12 to 6?). For instance, the
"Oniberon" frontispiece of Quiberon is quite similar to the later b&w
drawing of Quiberon steaming at Benny and Trot, although the frontispiece
lacks the small figures of Benny and Trot in the foreground. (And in the
color plate someone has been playing a round of tic-tac-toe on Quiberon.)
Your edition was updating in giving RPT's address as Schoolhouse Lane.
She lived there in the 40s and 50s (and 60s, I think). When her Oz books
were coming out, she was on Farragut Terrace. She liked to have an address
available for her so that her readers could keep in touch.
Interesting comments also about the more careful plotting in "Giant
Horse" and probability that the transformation of Tattypoo was planned, not
improvised.
Robin Olderman: Lyrical descriptions of natural beauty -- not all that
unusual in RPT's work, are they? The "Giant Horse" opening is a striking
example, but some other examples that occur to me are the Fiddle Forest in
"Cowardly Lion," Ojo among the unicorns, the sinister beauty of Wutz's cave.
Maybe unusual as an opening scene, though?
Nathan DeHoff: Your point that the the Scarecrow doesn't have direct
memories of being Chang Wang Woe -- after meeting Princess Orange Blossom
and his sons and grandsons, he might have a general feeling that he could
not have cared for that life when he was in it, even though he's deducing
rather than remembering?
Ruth Berman

From: Ozmama at a...
Date: Tue Nov 21, 2000 9:58 pm
Subject: Re: RPT's Lyricism
In a message dated 11/21/2000 7:50:20 PM Central Standard Time,
Nonestica at egroups.com writes:
<< Lyrical descriptions of natural beauty -- not all that
unusual in RPT's work, are they? The "Giant Horse" opening is a striking
example, but some other examples that occur to me are the Fiddle Forest in
"Cowardly Lion," Ojo among the unicorns, the sinister beauty of Wutz's cave.
Maybe unusual as an opening scene, though? >>Ruth
Very unusual, I think. You've cited two of my favorite scenes in
the Thompson books, and it wasn't 'til now that I realized that they
had a thread in common. More than lyric, Fiddle Forest and Unicorners
are places of romance and magic. Wutz's caverns are, indeed, beautiful
and chilling.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Wed Nov 22, 2000 1:39 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE and urban America
Rich Morrissey wrote:
<< << First picture of a car in an Oz book -- yes, I suppose
so, although Denslow had the Scarecrow and the Tinman driving about
recklessly in a turn-of-the-century car in his picture book about
them.>>
But doesn't that take place in America, not Oz? If so, weren't there
cars in the QUEER VISITORS FROM THE MARVELOUS LAND OF OZ strips as well? I
don't think anyone dared put cars in Oz itself until Neill introduced the
Scalawagons>>
The car pictured in GIANT HORSE is indeed on the streets of Boston, not in
Oz. (True to stereotypes of Boston drivers, the book describes a truck
barreling into Benny and breaking into pieces--"surely a pleasant
change from breaking up poor pedestrians" [52]. In fact, the
insurance industry says that Boston is now one of the safer cities in
which to drive; since no one can get up much speed, accidents are less
often serious.)
That GIANT HORSE seems to be the first Oz novel to include a picture of a car shows
a coupla trends. First is the success of the automobile industry in
the 1920s; it was no longer possible to depict a US city without auto
traffic. The second is Baum's tendency to bring Americans to Oz from
rural areas while Thompson's visitors came from cities or
suburbs. Baum gives us detailed pictures of several places from which his
travelers set off: the Kansas prairie, the ocean, parts of rural
California. In his books only Button-Bright comes from a big city or even a
town, and in neither ROAD nor SCARECROW do we actually see his departure.
In contrast, Thompson shows us Peter's Philadelphia and Benny's
Boston. For suburbs and smaller towns, we see Speedy's Long Island, Tompy's
Pennwood, David's Westover, and Bob Up's Stumptown, which seems to be outside
Philadelphia. LOST KING and SPEEDY show American wilderness, but in both
books it's clear that characters are merely visiting the areas. None of
Thompson's protagonists, not even Bill the Chicago weathercock, comes from
a farm like Dorothy or an isolated cottage like Trot.
That difference reflects the increasing urbanization of America.
Another likely reason is that Thompson always lived in or near the big city
of Philadelphia. Of course, Baum lived in an even bigger city, Chicago,
during the start of his children's writing career. But when he wrote fantasy
books, his mind often seems to have traveled back to his bucolic childhood
on the Roselawn estate.
Baum could show his magical characters causing chaos in a city,
just as Benny does. This is a repeated theme in QUEER VISITORS, WOGGLEBUG
BOOK, and AMERICAN FAIRY TALES. It seems significant that those stories,
like Denslow's comic series, were written for newspapers. Some were also
inspired by success on the stage. In other words, they were rooted in urban
culture to begin with.
In his Oz books, however, Baum seems to have chosen a different
path. The America he presents is almost exclusively rural, perhaps to
create a more striking contrast with the Emerald City--though Oz's capital
is hardly a teeming, skyscrapered metropolis. Baum wrote one long fantasy
that starts with detailed scenes from an American city: JOHN DOUGH. As
I suggested a while ago, John seems like an antecedent of Benny. Both
are old-fashioned gentlemen brought to life in cities who cause chaos
and end up dropping into fairyland. Both men take up
hats [47] and sticks/umbrellas [48]. Both even worry about their coattails
chipping [198]. And both have an appealing mixture of strength and childlike
vulnerability.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Wed Nov 22, 2000 3:37 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE history
We've talked about the dating of GIANT HORSE. This exercise may be as
foolhardy for us as it is for Benny [208] because Ozian time may not work
like ours in ways we don't know. This book implies, for instance, that it
can be night in Boston and before 7:00 AM in Oz [54, 79]. Nevertheless,
here's my take on the troublesome topic of time.
At first, Thompson's statements about when events happened in the
past are vague:
* "nothing much has been heard for many a year" of the King of the
Munchkins [18-9].
* "ancient Oz maps" show the Ozure Isles, but "Oz maps to-day"--i.e.,
the one published in TIK-TOK, which Thompson seems to have used as
reference and inspiration--do not [19].
* Mombi stole Orin and sent Quiberon to Lake Orizon "in olden days" [20].
As GIANT HORSE goes on, however, Thompson establishes more definite times for historic events.
The result is a chronology that's fairly consistent within the book,
but causes problems when we try to place it in the larger history of
Oz.
The dating seems to start when Herby claims, "I've been shut up in
that bottle for thirty years" [120]. He's heard of "the Emerald
City...but a day's journey from Mombi's hut" [132], so he was
bottled after the Wizard established himself in Oz. He recognizes
Mombi's hut, but doesn't know that Tattypoo drove her from it [127].
Orpah describes Quiberon thrusting him into Cave City, and says
he's been a captive there "for twenty years" [168]. Thompson
reports the period was "nearly twenty years" [230].
Thompson ties all this together when Orin returns. "Twenty-five years
ago," Mombi ruled the north, Cheeriobed's father was kidnapped, and Orin
and Cheeriobed married. After a decent year, they had Philador
[257-9]. Two years after that [a figure Orpah confirms, with the
implication that Philador aged steadily during these two years--167], Mombi
kidnapped and transformed Orin. "The same day Quiberon came roaring
across the lake" [167], having been sent by Mombi [20]. Tattypoo
wandered "for several months" before returning and driving
Mombi away [260].
So Thompson tells us that Quiberon has been terrorizing the Ozure
Isles for 22 years, and that he's been at that task for over two years
before he snatched Orpah away. That somewhat accords with what the merman
says about the sea horses gradually disappearing: "One by one, he
devoured the herd of sea horses." It also means it took a while
before Orpah "tried to defend them" [167].
Finally, Trot reports that "Mombi was put out two years ago"
[165].
Thus, we have this time line-
30 years before GIANT HORSE: Mombi bottles Herby.
25 YBGH: Orin and Cheeriobed wed, Mombi kidnaps Cheeriobed's
father.
24 YBGH: Philador born.
22 YBGH: Mombi kidnaps Orin, installs Quiberon in Lake Orizon.
~21 YBGH: Tattypoo conquers Mombi.
~19 YBGH: Orpah confronts Quiberon and gets stuck in Cave City.
~14 YBGH: Philador hits ten years old and stays there.
2 YBGH: Mombi starts work at Kimbaloo, meets Pajuka, and travels to
the Emerald City, acts that lead to her liquidation.
That's all well and good, but how does this chronology fit with the
others books? WIZARD and LAND must occur no earlier than 20 YBGH because
the Good Witch of the North is firmly in control in those books. (That in
turn implies that the King of the Munchkins mentioned briefly in OZMA and
ROAD isn't Cheeriobed's father; he's already "utterly destroyed"
[278].)
But then things start to get messy. Despite having been liquefied
about a decade before Ozma came to the throne, Herby knows about her and
her magic, including her "famous picture" [132]. To reconcile
that
statement, we may have to assume that Herby's time in a bottle mixed up his
memory of what happened when. Here's one possible explanation--
Mombi met Herby AFTER she'd lost her magic. Seeing him stirring his
potion the way she'd recently known how to do, she spitefully pushed him
into his cauldron [123]. There's nothing about their encounter that
requires Mombi to work magic; she simply has to be muscular and bitter.
Then Tattypoo bottled the mixture, or someone else bottled it and brought
it to her, on the assumption that anything in a bubbling cauldron near
Mombi had to be dangerous. Since Herby had been in the bottle since about
15 YBGH, he could have known about Ozma. Indeed, for those who believe
Ozians were mortal through the Wizard's time, her accession explains why
the medicine man found no customers for his original wares [122].
That still leaves the numerical puzzle of explaining how every Oz
adventure since WIZARD could fit into approximately 20 years. One clue into
what Thompson was thinking is that LOST KING and GIANT HORSE were published
three years apart, but only two years passes between their events in Oz
history [165]. GIANT HORSE is the 22nd Oz book. If we assign two-thirds of
a year in Oz history to each book, then WIZARD would indeed have taken
place somewhere around 15 YBGH, fitting neatly into this book's overall
chronology. Whether we can reconcile that chronology with the publication
schedule of all the books, or with clues about timing in other books, is
another question.

From: "ruth berman" <berma005 at ...>
Date: Fri Nov 24, 2000 3:09 pm
Subject: odds and regnant Mombi in oz
J.L. Bell: In addition to the "Road" and "Scarecrow" avoidance of direct
depiction of Button Bright's Philadelphia, "Sky Island" could also be
mentioned here -- although Neill gave a beautiful portrait of Philadelphia
in the end-papers (reproduced several years back as a pair of "Baum Bugle"
covers).
On dating "Giant Horse" -- there's actually a sort of double chronology
going on (not counting Herby, who is a separate problem -- your suggestion
that his bottled time was much less than he thought is attractived). There's
the explicit chronology you cite, which seems to have an implicit connection
to the mentions of the King of the Munchkins in "Ozma" and "Road." Orin's
statement that 25 years ago she and Cheeriobed were married (and he became
came), and then five years later she was abducted fit pretty well for the
1928 publication with having Baum mention a King of the Munchkins free to
greet Ozma ("Ozma," 1907) or visit the Emerald City ("Road," 1909). But the
text doesn't actually say that Cheeriobed is that Munchkin King, and RPT may
have forgotten this connection (and may also have forgotten the group of
25/20 years she had mentioned, or may have decided that they were "really"
only rough approximations for something more like 35/30 or even 40/35).
On the other side of the chronology, Orin's kidnapping implicitly has to
take place before the end of "Wizard" -- because it is not just Mombi, A
wicked witch, who kidnaps her, but Mombi, THE wicked witch who is the ruler
of the Gillikins. Mombi was not the ruler of the Gillikins when she first
showed up in Oz history, in "Land." She already been overthrown by the GWN
before the events of "Wizard." (Well, in a sense, she hadn't yet, because
Baum hadn't yet decided to explain the situation of Mombi a wicked witch
partly kept under control by the GWN as the result of Mombi a previous
wicked-witch-ruler overthrown by the GWN, which he introduced in
"Dorothy/Wizard," but with the "D/W" info included, she had already been.)
The Wizard knows that the GWN overthrew Mombi and ended her reign, and
that event must therefore have happened before he left Oz in "Wizard." In
fact, the "D/W" phrasing implies that the overthrow happened at the at the
start of the Wizard's own reign, although it's vague enough to leave open
the possibility that the GWN overthrew Mombi later than the start of the
Wizard's reign, and perhaps even quite late in his reign. But not as late as
after "Wizard."
I've argued on other occasions that one way of reconciling the
discrepancy between 25/20-years-ago-and-a-mobile-Munchkin-king and
at-the-time-when-Mombi-ruled-the-Gillikins is to suppose that the abduction
of Orin did not happen at the same time as Quiberon's arrival, leaving room
for a sorrowing but free Cheeriobed to put in minimal appearances for his
ceremonial duties. I should mention here that this explanation is not what
RPT would have had in mind. Orpah the merman says explicitly that Quiberon
appeared the same day Orin disappeared. (Possibly he was mistaken, his
memory conflating two separate traumatic events -- but his evidence shows
that RPT was thinking in terms of no such gap between the disappearance and
appearance.)
RPT's own reconciliation, if the editors had pressed her for one, would
probably have been that Orin's chronology was off, and Baum's King of the
Munchkins was somebody other than Cheeriobed, after all. But it's easy
enough to lose track of chronology in trying to integrate what was evidently
two separate ideas (the story of why the King of the Munchkins dropped out
of sight and the story of what the Queen was doing in the meantime), and she
probably did not herself notice the discrepancy that had arisen between
having as her villain the regnant WWN and 25/20 years ago dates. And her
editors evidently didn't notice it, either.
Ruth Berman

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Nov 25, 2000 7:49 pm
Subject: GIANT KING motifs and images
As I read GIANT HORSE, I was struck by how many images or actions seemed borrowed from older
stories, and even from other parts of the book. There are two motifs
that occur multiple times, whether because Thompson saw them as
fitting her theme or because her focus on the overall plot made her ignore
repetition in little things. One of those motifs is giant birds carrying
people away; we see:
* the Grand Mo-Gull taking Philador to Tattypoo's cottage [41].
* Akbad carrying off Trot, Benny, and the Scarecrow [76], and later
rescuing Orin from Quiberon [235-6]. He's not really a bird, of course, but
Thompson repeatedly describes him as like one: "like some strange
ungainly bird" [42], "a great ugly bird" [61], "a
horriblus bird" and "a most fearful, queerful bird"
[66], and "the great ugly bird-man" [74].
* Mombi kidnapping Orin on a "black eagle" [259].
* Orin returning to Lake Orizon via a "basket bird" [261].
The other repeated trope is people being enchanted or rescued from
enchantment. The known victims are:
* the "poor forest maiden" whom Tattypoo restores (to be "no less than a King's
daughter," naturally) from an unknown charm [109].
* a woodcutter Mombi was turning into a tree stump when Tattypoo conquered
her [110]. (What do witches have against woodmen, anyway?)
* Orin kidnapped, confined, and turned into an old witch [259-60].
* Agnes, Orin's maid from Gilkenny, "bewitched by Mombi" for no
unstated reason [261].
Another source of images in GIANT HORSE seems to be traditional Western
mythology. We have:
* a maiden sacrificed to a sea monster [27].
* a golden fruit, and a fruit that mustn't be plucked [27].
* animals rewarding young hero for his kindness [31].
* a woman spinning straw into silver [105].
Probably folks can up with more: the truth-telling mirror, for instance. These are in contrast
to Thompson's usual method of inventing her own magical acts or
putting more of a new twist on old ones.
Eighteenth-century Britain seems to gave provided Thompson with the visual
images of Herby, with his queued white wig, and Joe King, in his Highlander
kilt.
Yet another source that seems to inform her Oz stories at this time is the
Egyptomania renewed by the discovery of Kig Tut's tomb in 1922. In GNOME
KING, the Sultan of Suds (one of her typical angry types borrowed from the
Islamic world) says, "Tut! Tut!" I won't go further than to say
that might have been a punning reference to the boy king. There's no
question, however, that the Silhouettes looking like Egyptian
paintings [170] and the character Ozeerus (Osiris) are references to
the ancient Nile civilization.

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...>
Subject: Mombi's Magic
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 02:06:53 -0000
In _Lost King_, Mombi attempts to summon monsters. Since her powers are
gone, she has no luck in doing this, but _Giant Horse_ makes it clear that
she did have this ability at one point. Whether she actually created
monsters or simply forced already existing ones to do her bidding is
unknown, but she not only commanded Quiberon, but also the black eagle that
she rode while capturing Orin.
In his comments on Mombi's deeds, J. L. Bell mentions that Mombi really had
no reason for transforming Agnes. Another question is why she would have
turned Agnes into such a powerful creature. Wouldn't a dragon pose a threat
to her? So would another witch, for that matter. Dave's Locasta theory
gives a possible explanation for why Mombi would make Orin into a witch, but
I think another possibility is that the Wicked Witch of the North was
planning on enslaving Orin and Agnes. Something must have gone wrong with
her spell, and the two victims retained their own wills.
Nathan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Tue Nov 28, 2000 8:43 am
Subject: GIANT HORSE illogicalities
For the sake of her plot, Thompson needed something--she decided it would
be Quiberon--to isolate the Ozurians from the rest of Oz. At the same time,
she needed reasons and routes for both Akbad and Philador to get to the
mainland. Then she needed some mechanism, however coincidental, for
Tattypoo to be released from her enchantment and return to Lake Orizon, but
in a manner in which Quiberon would menace her in the novel's action
climax. This produces a series of illogicalities in GIANT HORSE that are
very hard to reconcile.
The Ozurians have heard about Mombi's fall from power from the blue
gulls [29]. They even have books with pictures of Trot [26, 35] and the
Scarecrow [203]. But those same gulls haven't carried any complaints about
Quiberon to Ozma or Tattypoo. And Philador, whom the birds regard as a
friend worthy of help [31, 40], never thinks to ask them to.
Mombi's cottage is a window that foretells everyone's past and
future [111]. Not only have Tattypoo and Agnes never looked in it, but
Mombi never seems to have used it, either. If she had, she'd presumably
have known that Cheeriobed would reject her suit, that Tattypoo would
conquer her, and that she'd come to a bad end in the Emerald City.
Finally, despite Quiberon's size, noise, smoke, and general
destructiveness, a fisherman on Lake Orizon knows nothing about him [262].
This must be the stupidest person in Oz.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Tue Nov 28, 2000 8:52 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] GIANT HORSE illogicalities
J. L. Bell:
> Mombi's cottage is a window that foretells everyone's past and
>future [111]. Not only have Tattypoo and Agnes never looked in it, but
>Mombi never seems to have used it, either. If she had, she'd presumably
>have known that Cheeriobed would reject her suit, that Tattypoo would
>conquer her, and that she'd come to a bad end in the Emerald City.
I would guess that the Witch's Window either shows very general
information,
without specifics, or else visions out of context. Either way, it probably
would not have supplied enough details to tell Mombi (or Tattypoo) exactly
what was going to happen in the future.
> Finally, despite Quiberon's size, noise, smoke, and general
>destructiveness, a fisherman on Lake Orizon knows nothing about him [262].
>This must be the stupidest person in Oz.
He could have come from another area, hoping to find some good salt-water
fish, and arrived after Quiberon had become stuck in the cave. Or maybe he
just liked to take risks.
Nathan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Tue Nov 28, 2000 3:54 pm
Subject: Mombi's magic
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<In _Lost King_, Mombi attempts to summon monsters. Since her powers are
gone, she has no luck in doing this, but _Giant Horse_ makes it clear that
she did have this ability at one point. Whether she actually created
monsters or simply forced already existing ones to do her bidding is
unknown, but she not only commanded Quiberon, but also the black eagle that
she rode while capturing Orin.>>
Interesting connections. Lake Orizon is saline [19], so to find a water
monster who could live there Mombi would have had to conjure one up or
bring one all the way from the Nonestic. There doesn't seem to be a
closerlarge body of saltwater.
Whether Mombi forced Quiberon and the eagle to act against their
will isn't so clear. Communication between humans and animals being so easy
in Oz, they may simply have made common cause.
<<In his comments on Mombi's deeds, J. L. Bell mentions that Mombi really
had no reason for transforming Agnes. Another question is why she would
have turned Agnes into such a powerful creature. Wouldn't a dragon pose a
threat to her? So would another witch, for that matter. Dave's Locasta
theory gives a possible explanation for why Mombi would make Orin into a
witch, but I think another possibility is that the Wicked Witch of the
North was planning on enslaving Orin and Agnes. Something must have gone
wrong with her spell, and the two victims retained their own wills.>>
I said Thompson never states Mombi's reason for transforming Agnes, which
is a little different from the witch having no reason. [Actually, through a
typo I said there was "no unstated reason"--oops.]
Thompson doesn't explain the circumstances of Agnes's
transformation, either. She simply says the amiable dragon walked into the
witch's hut on the same day it changed hands from Mombi to Tattypoo [108].
That coincidence may point to this explanation: Mombi, seeking revenge for
her humiliation by Orin, flew to Gilkenny. There she sought out the maid
she'd seen with Orin before her wedding and changed her into a monster.
Finally, she used magic to send the resulting dragon back to her old
cottage--Gilkenny doesn't seem to be near that home [261]. Either Mombi was
willing to enjoy a private revenge on her rival or she hoped the dragon
would destroy Tattypoo. In any event, Agnes's essential goodness, like
Orin's, foiled Mombi's plan.
Alternatively, Mombi might have enchanted Agnes three years before
while trying to gain information about Orin and Cheeriobed. Or Agnes may
have been just one of many people Mombi enchanted during her career as a
tyrannical witch. It would be a mighty coincidence indeed if Agnes happened
to reunite with her old mistress on the very day of Mombi's defeat, but
Thompson has relied on mightier coincidences.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Thu Nov 30, 2000 11:30 am
Subject: GIANT HORSE villains
In GIANT HORSE, Mombi takes on the J. Glegg/Abrog role of the evil
magician, mad with love and jealousy, who kidnaps and enchants a princess.
But she also has the Irashi/Mustafa role of the short-tempered ruler who
enslaves and imprisons innocent subjects and strangers. (Some of the
communities Trot visits also fit this model, but to no consequence.)
Because Mombi is so evil and casts such a long, dark shadow even after her
death, there's room for the villains who actually appear in GIANT HORSE to
show some moral nuances.
Folks have already discussed how Akbad isn't presented as purely evil, but
as a misguided mixture of impulses. It's clear from the start that he's
going to be this story's antagonist: he calls storytelling "a pernicious
and wicked habit," never a good way to endear oneself to readers [26]. But
he's really a Machiavellian utilitarian, foil to Cheeriobed's optimistic
moralist: "Surely it is better for one mortal to be destroyed than a whole
Kingdom. . . . The King's a soft-hearted old Joffywax" [35].
Even when Akbad thinks of himself--"I, Akbad the Soothsayer, am in
danger of being destroyed utterly. Utterly! Utterly!"--he's already
expressed worry about Cheeriobed and Philador [25]. Once he's plucked the
golden pear and taken wing(s), Akbad carries through with his plan to carry
off a mortal girl from the Emerald City. He doesn't take advantage of his
power to obtain wealth or position for himself. (However, he does
momentarily seem to succumb to the temptation to frighten Benny and the Scarecrow [75].)
Akbad promptly returns to Cheeriobed's castle to claim credit for
saving the kingdom. But "the king's commendation" is all he wants [99]. He
doesn't ask for special reward, or influence, or a princess's hand (compare
this to the villain in GRAMPA). When Cheeriobed doesn't praise him, Akbad
immediately tries to undo what he's done, but he can't [100]. He's even
driven to attempting suicide [231]. Uncharacteristically for Thompson, she
makes her villain into a figure of sympathy.
Thompson calls Akbad a "cowardly fellow" [231], but even when he's
"stiff with fright and terror" he's able to take action for the Ozure
Isles. As Quiberon is about to attack Orin, "some of the spirit and courage
that had distinguished him in his youth returned" to the soothsayer [235].
In other words, just as Tattypoo turns out never to have been a real witch,
Akbad turns out never to have been a real villain.
In the end, Cheeriobed banishes Akbad from his court, but not from
the islands the soothsayer seems so devoted to. Ozma and the Wizard even
unburden him of those wings [264]; contrast this with how they treat other
sly villains like Ippty, Mooj, and Mombi herself.
Similarly, Quiberon is less than a complete monster. It's not even clear at
the outset what sort of monster he is: "No sea serpent was ever uglier than
Quiberon, fire shot from his eye and smoke from his nostrils. He had the
head scales and talons of a dragon and the long hideous body of a giant
fear-fish" [24]. But later she says he IS a "great fear-fish" [90, 250].
Though Quiberon is rough, demanding, and violent, his function is
clearly to isolate the Ozurians, not to harm them. He lives on the fifth
Ozure island by himself. He doesn't destroy all he could. "Not caring for
land food Quiberon had never molested the keepers of his cavern" [25]. He
doesn't eat Orpah when he seems to have been able to [167]. He doesn't seem
to sink the boat Orin arrives in [235-6].
All Quiberon wants is a mortal maid to care for him, "sweep out the
cave and tell me stories" [85]. In other words, he wants a mother. At first
he communicates through smoke writing, like the McGraws' Bill Bored [24],
but for Trot even willing to "speak without smoking" [84]. Though he won't
promise to keep Trot alive or not to get angry, his demands are actually
mild compared to the shades and Roundabouties.
Thompson doesn't put us inside Quiberon's head the way she makes us
privy to Akbad's despair, but she reports he feels "anger and pain" when
Benny knocks his teeth out [90]. In the end, it's clear he's just a beast
whose natural instincts have been harnessed by Mombi, not an ambitious,
scheming villain. Nevertheless, the Wizard finds him worthy of being turned
into a big metal statue.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 12:22 pm
Subject: Giant Horse History
J.L.:
> The dating seems to start when Herby claims, "I've been shut up in
>that bottle for thirty years" [120]. He's heard of "the Emerald City...but
>a day's journey from Mombi's hut" [132], so he was bottled after the Wizard
>established himself in Oz.
While I agree that Herby must have been bottled after the Wizard
established himself in Oz, I don't think it's related to the
existence of the Emerald City. It's true that the Wizard built (or
"bossed the job" of building) the Emerald City as we know it, but in
_Land_ Glinda refers to Pastoria as being "ruler of the Emerald
City," and Ozma as inheriting "the throne of the Emerald City." I
think the evidence is strong that there was a settlement called the
Emerald City in the green country before the time of the Wizard.
Possibly it was destroyed by the conspiracy of Wicked Witches, so the
EC we know was built on empty ground, but Herby could have been
referring to the original EC and not the one the Wizard built.
However, if he's even halfway accurate with regard to the "thirty
years" he must have been bottled after the Wizard's arrival, since
that was surely more than thirty years before the events of _Wizard_,
much less _Giant Horse_.
> Whether we can reconcile that chronology with the publication
>schedule of all the books, or with clues about timing in other books, is
>another question.
As I've said before, I think the Baum Oz books mostly took place in
quite a short time, based on the aging (or lack thereof) of the child
characters in the Outside World. Dorothy seems to be at least 7 in
_Wizard_, yet the best evidence is that she's 11 in EC and the
remaining books. That means only 4 years between _Wizard_ and EC, and
my opinion is that most of that time was between _Wizard_ and _Ozma_.
I do not think, for instance, that Ozma would have let one of her
birthdays pass without bringing Dorothy to Oz; that this is only
recorded in one book implies strongly to me that less than two years
pass between _Ozma_ and EC.
Then there's Button-Bright; he seems to be at least four in _Road_
(though Baum says Dorothy thought he was a year or two younger than
she - I think Dot wasn't too good at gauging age if she thought
that), and no more than 8 or 9 in _Scarecrow_, so that would put
_Scarecrow_ at most 5 years after EC. So the longest span I can
justify between _Wizard_ and _Scarecrow_ is 9 years, and I suspect it
might have been a year or two less. If we put _Wizard_ in 1899, that
would put _Scarecrow_ in 1908. There isn't much to date the remaining
books between _Scarecrow_ and _Giant Horse_, though.

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 11:49 am
Subject: Reilly & Lee's attention
A coupla signs of how little attention Reilly & Lee was giving the Oz
manuscripts in the mid-1920s show up in GIANT HORSE. On page 145, the firm
set Joe King's verse off from the main text, then stuck "he roared lustily"
right in the middle of it. Even worse, on page 166, we find this sentence
in Orpah's dialogue: "Yes, -----, For many years I cared for the sea horses
of Cheeriobed,..." Thompson seems to have left a dash in her manuscript to
be filled in or removed later, and her editor never bothered to make sure
she did so!
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Thu Dec 21, 2000 10:36 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE and Boston
One plot thread of GIANT HORSE starts off with the Oz books' most detailed
portrayal of American poverty since Dorothy emigrated to the Emerald City
[45-7]: "Dan, the second-hand man,...bought old clothes which he mended and
pressed and sold again to people who could not afford new ones." In "his
dim little Boston shop" and home on a "narrow street," he has "a rickety
sewing machine" and a "cracked mirror."
But after a bit it starts to appear as if Thompson is using Dan as
a figure of fun, with the main joke being a poor man putting on airs. In
his "worn and shabby" suit, just stitched together, Dan thinks he looks
"quite as fine as the groom" his niece is marrying. "In honor of the grand
occasion [he] had purchased a handful of five cent cigars," one of which he
keeps "in place in his mouth with great difficulty" as he reads aloud.
Thompson then starts to refer to the man as "Danny," and later
tells us he's "an old Irishman" [59]. That seems to add a layer of
ethnicity on top of this picture of a second-hand man, though at this
cultural distance it's hard to guess whether Thompson expected her audience
to have already understood that a poor Boston man named Dan was Irish.
Similarly, it's tough to sense what Thompson had in mind when she
wrote that the suit came from "a dusky gentleman" [46]. Later she states
"the owner of Danny's dress suit must have been a powerful magician"
because of the notebook of spells in its pocket [48]. Was this owner the
same "dusky" man who sold the suit to Dan? Or did Thompson mean an earlier
owner, and expect her readers to understand that? "Dusky" was usually code
for dark-skinned (Baum used it for his Tottenhots in PATCHWORK GIRL), but
what ethnic meaning did Thompson attach to it in this book:
African-American, Arab, other?
There's more slapstick at the expense of a "quite deaf...old lady"
who "jumped over a little hedge and fell face down among the pansies" [48]
and a "tramp" who suffers a "terrible tumble" when Benny breaks a park
bench [50]. As the action heats up and firemen turn their hose on Benny,
the scene starts to feel more and more like one of the more elaborate urban
slapstick movies of the period: Keaton's COPS (1922) or Laurel & Hardy's
BATTLE OF THE CENTURY (1927).
Did Thompson have a specific place in mind for this action? It
doesn't seem likely. Benny was standing in "a little park" with a "cinder
path," within sight of a "small pond" and within earshot of a "band on warm
summer evenings" [57]. That doesn't sound like Boston's most famous park,
the large Common and adjacent Public Garden. But there aren't many other
parks with ponds. The gentleman who sold Dan the suit lived "in Grant
street in Boston." The only Grant Street in the city today (and it hasn't
changed much since the 1920s) is in Dorchester, then as now a working-class
away from the center of town. One could find "a small park" or two in
Dorchester, but none with ponds that I know of, and whether any had a
granite statue of a public benefactor I can't say.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Dec 23, 2000 7:19 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE rhetoric
Ironically, for a story that hinges on female power (Mombi, Orin/Tattypoo,
Ozma), GIANT HORSE presents a limited picture of gender roles. Philador has
never skipped rope, but has seen "little girls" do so [135]. Benny calls
Jinjur's coup "unladylike" [183].
On the other hand, after Trot says, "If anyeone ever asks me to
play a round game, I'll, I'll hit them--yes, I will" [193], Benny doesn't
say she's unladylike. Instead, he adopts that behavior: "Shall I hit
somebody?" [196]
There's also a fair amount of hostility expressed through insults,
which seems to be where Thompson put her lexical imagination in this book.
Akbad says, "The King's a soft-hearted old Joffywax" [35]. Toddledy calls
Akbad a "Miserable Mesmerizer" [98], a phrase Thompson will reuse in JACK
PUMPKINHEAD. The Scarecrow does a neat vaudeville turnabout from calmness
to panic when he sees Akbad swooping down, and uncharacteristically yells
at Benny, "Run, you son of a boulder!" [61] Even Benny the innocent gets
into this style, coming up with insulting "words that he had never known":
"Whankus! Wallybuster!" [74] (The former doesn't seem related to a new type
of wild beast, the walapus [131].)
The Scarecrow also yells, "Hey!" with the pun on "hay" [202], as in
Thompson's DAY IN OZ play (performed at the Centennial).
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Dec 23, 2000 9:41 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE giant horse
Folks have pondered why this book's titled GIANT HORSE when High Boy
doesn't show up until more than halfway through, at page 141, and is
somewhat peripheral to the far-reaching conflict between Mombi and the
Ozurians.
I don't think High Boy would allow it to be any other way. He's got
a personality as giant as his body. He takes charge of every gathering he
joins [206-7, 255, 272]. He bosses around even Philador; though he quickly
takes a shine to the prince, he also speaks to him "reproachfully" and
"reprovingly" [169, 207]. High Boy's not just a high horse; he seems to be
on one himself. If Thompson and Reilly & Lee had any difficulty finding a
title to encapsulate this book's main plot without giving it away, High Boy
would naturally step into that vacuum.
I imagine High Boy might be what all horses seem like to someone
who doesn't enjoy horses: frighteningly tall, massive, toothy, and hard to
keep under control. As he says in response to a fine how-do-you-do? from
the Scarecrow, "As I'm told sometimes, and as I please, others" [203]. High
Boy tosses his riders off [206] and threatens to nip one [225]. No wonder
Philador feels "nervousness" when shaking his hoof [143].
In a book with several fine cliff-hangers, one of the best is at
the end of chapter 16 when the Ozurians are cowering in their castle from
Quiberon's attacks. "A blue sapphire skylight splintered to bits and a
great head was thrust through the opening" [236]. This head turns out to be
not the fear-fish's, but High Boy's [250]. That seems appropriate because
the high horse is, in his own big-hearted way, a monster.
High Boy is also in many ways like Kabumpo, but he never seems to
demand dignity or insist that everyone follow his plan. He manages to keep
his contempt for the Sawhorse unspoken, for instance [275-7]. As a result,
he never seems to suffer a comeuppance. I bet Thompson could have done more
with him.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Dec 23, 2000 9:41 pm
Subject: GIANT HORSE final thoughts
A potentially clever line: "His heart...dropped so suddenly into his boots
both boots fell off" [42]. For me it's slightly spoiled by the awkwardly
repeated b's at the end.
The "Keep Awake pills" that Herby hands out seem suspiciously like uppers,
but that may appropriate since he pulls them out for a high horse from Up
Town [226].
According to Thompson, Ozma has a ritual for making people like Herby and
Benny courtiers: "coming 'round to where they sat, she touched them both on
the shoulder with her emerald scepter, to show they now belonged to her
court" [275]. This is more reminiscent of knighting people than of the
spoken invitations to stick around that Baum's Ozma usually issued. Another
of Thompson's borrowings from how things fairytale kingdoms were
traditionally supposed to work.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "John W. Kennedy"
<jwkenne at a...>
Date: Sat Dec 23, 2000 10:57 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] GIANT HORSE and Boston
"J. L. Bell" wrote:
> But after a bit it starts to appear as if Thompson is using Dan as
> a figure of fun, with the main joke being a poor man putting on airs. In
> his "worn and shabby" suit, just stitched together, Dan thinks he looks
> "quite as fine as the groom" his niece is marrying. "In honor of the grand
> occasion [he] had purchased a handful of five cent cigars," one of which he
> keeps "in place in his mouth with great difficulty" as he reads aloud.
Well, I think it is meant to produce a smile rather than a laugh.
> Similarly, it's tough to sense what Thompson had in mind when she
> wrote that the suit came from "a dusky gentleman" [46]. Later she states
> "the owner of Danny's dress suit must have been a powerful magician"
> because of the notebook of spells in its pocket [48]. Was this owner the
> same "dusky" man who sold the suit to Dan? Or did Thompson mean an earlier
> owner, and expect her readers to understand that? "Dusky" was usually code
> for dark-skinned (Baum used it for his Tottenhots in PATCHWORK GIRL), but
> what ethnic meaning did Thompson attach to it in this book:
> African-American, Arab, other?
Given _both_ the data, Indian (as in the subcontinent) is the only
plausible reading.
--
John W. Kennedy
(Working from my laptop)

From: "General Purplefeet" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Tue Dec 26, 2000 12:40 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] GIANT HORSE rhetoric
J. L. Bell:
> The Scarecrow also yells, "Hey!" with the pun on "hay" [202], as
>in
>Thompson's DAY IN OZ play (performed at the Centennial).
It is interesting that the Scarecrow casually refers to his stuffing as
"hay" in this book, while _Tin Woodman_ clearly presented him as an
oat-straw elitist.
Nathan

From: Darth-Bane at J...
Date: Thu Dec 28, 2000 5:55 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Brief thoughts on Giant Horse and messed
up chronology
Well, just finished Giant Horse of Oz:
I'll be brief since all of you are probably tired of hearing comments on
this particular book. Bottom line, I liked it. Another thing I discover
that I like about RPT's work, not unlike Baum's, is that nearly every
book she writes has a different feel and flavor to it than the last. You
don't get tired of their writing styles which I see as a sign of a good
writer. Anyhow, maybe it's because I was half sick reading it, but this
book had more of a phantasmagoric feel to it than prior ones. Also,
Thompson has returned to infusing her story with deeper meanings and
motivations in the storylines and characters. Some of the conversations,
particularly with Scarecrow and Benny bear this out. I liked what she
did with Akbad as well. Neither purely villain nor hero, but a well
written tragic figure. For Thompson, this is a move in the right
direction and one I hope she continued. Unfortunately, she stuck with
the Dragon=Evil sterotype again, which I hate, and once more creates a
dragon that, IMO, hardly seems evil. Granted, it's an improvement over
her previous books. She at leasts ATTEMPTS to show that Quiberon is
evil. (And thankfully that moron Don Quixote rip-off Sir Hokus doesn't
slay him.) Only problem, as has been pointed out, is that Quiberon holds
back from being truly evil in several instances (the only real instance
being the eating of the sea horses - an act that marks him as no
different than several other notables - remember the Button Kingdom? -
who are not portrayed as being "evil"). That fact coupled with the
notion that he was likely under Mombi's control (same problem as the bees
and wolves of the WWW), should have resulted in a less permanent end to
poor Quiberon's life. Ironic that the books that seem to need the most
rectifying are the ones that are NOT in public domain...
Side point: What's up with John's illustrations?! Am I the only one who
notices how he draws so-called "evil" characters as somewhat sympathetic
and good characters as malevolent-looking? There's a picture of Quiberon
entering the cave that makes him look positively sad and miserable,
therefore, eliciting sympathy from the readers. He did the same thing
with the last dragon RPT had slain... On the other side of things, his
creepy drawings of the Wizard always make me think he's up to no good!
(I also thought the portrayal of Joe-King in the color plate was
absolutely hideous when he should have been humorous). And aside from
all of this, why the marked lack of consistency among the different
drawings of the same character?! Some of them don't even faintly
resemble their prior selves! I just don't get it. It's not like Neill
didn't have his own illustrations to use for reference.
Back to Giant Horse: Well developed characters again, an even tighter
plot, interesting locations, adventures and enemies (the shadows were
great). I still don't understand why certain not-so-villainous villains
get punished while whole tribes of evildoers are not. To be honest, my
main concern in this book was the mixed up chronology. Again, this is
something an editor, paying only half attention, should have caught and
rectified. As it stands, I don't know what to make of it. Someone
mentioned earlier something about each book occurring every 2/3 of a
year. I wonder if that estimation would work for the dilemma of Peter's
age (9 in Gnome King, 11 in Pirates which is four books later)?
joe 'confused by time in Oz again'

From: "General Purplefeet" <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Thu Dec 28, 2000 12:55 pm
Subject: BCF: Orpah and the Grand Mo-Gull
In _The Sea Fairies_, Baum establishes that mermaids can breathe underwater
because they are surrounded by a tiny layer of air. This means that the
mermaids are not really wet, even when underwater. _Giant Horse_, however,
states that Orpah and Cheeriobed's embrace "wet His Majesty considerably,
Orpah having stepped directly out of the water." Also, Orpah is described
as having "wet hands" when he rescues Trot. Either Thompson forgot about
Baum's explanation for the merfolk being able to breathe, or she intended
Orpah to be a different sort of mer-person. If the latter, this raises the
question as to how Orpah is able to breathe underwater.
The Grand Mo-Gull describes himself as being "King of all the land and sea
birds." A gull having such a role is rather odd. _The Annotated Wizard of
Oz_ mentions that the eagle is generally considered to be lord of the birds
(in the same way that the lion is king of beasts). The gull as King is an
interesting choice, however, since this sort of bird bridges air, land, and
sea (although seagulls never go very far out to sea, from what I've heard).
Nathan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sun Dec 31, 2000 10:21 pm
Subject: Grand Mo-Gull
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<The Grand Mo-Gull describes himself as being "King of all the land and
sea birds." A gull having such a role is rather odd. _The Annotated
Wizard of Oz_ mentions that the eagle is generally considered to be lord of
the birds (in the same way that the lion is king of beasts). The gull as
King is an interesting choice, however, since this sort of bird bridges
air, land, and sea (although seagulls never go very far out to sea, from
what I've heard).>>
Perhaps the Grand Mo-Gull meant "King of all the land-and-sea birds"--i.e.,
those birds equally at home on land and sea, as opposed to those who prefer
the land. The Grand Mo-Gull must be somewhat comfortable flying over land,
given that the blue gulls' body of saltwater is a great, dry distance from
the ocean.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: RMorris306 at ...
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 23:23:50 EST
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Grand Mo-Gull
In a message dated 1/1/01 10:17:38 PM, JnoLBell at ... writes:
<< Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<The Grand Mo-Gull describes himself as being "King of all the land and
sea birds." A gull having such a role is rather odd. _The Annotated
Wizard of Oz_ mentions that the eagle is generally considered to be lord of
the birds (in the same way that the lion is king of beasts). The gull as
King is an interesting choice, however, since this sort of bird bridges
air, land, and sea (although seagulls never go very far out to sea, from
what I've heard).>>
Perhaps the Grand Mo-Gull meant "King of all the land-and-sea birds"--i.e.,
those birds equally at home on land and sea, as opposed to those who prefer
the land. The Grand Mo-Gull must be somewhat comfortable flying over land,
given that the blue gulls' body of saltwater is a great, dry distance from
the ocean. >>
Or perhaps Thompson is deliberately tweaking tradition, the way Baum did
more than once. Although the Cowardly Lion eventually does become a King of
Beasts, the King of Beasts in the Gillikin Forest (in MAGIC) is Gugu the
leopard. (Even more offbeat...since at least a leopard resembles a lion in
being a big, predatory cat...was the weasel king in THE WOGGLE-BUG BOOK.) To
make a gull, rather than an eagle, the king of the birds seems fully in that
mode to me...
Rich

From: "ruth berman" <berma005 at ...>
Subject: reading in oz
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 09:14:15 -0600
J.L. Bell: Do gulls need to be near an ocean? In summer we have a lot of
gulls in Minnesota, apparently quite happy hanging around freshwater lakes.
(I'm not sure if they're exactly the same gull as the seagull, but they look
the same to this uninstructed eye.)
Ruth Berman

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Thu Jan 4, 2001 10:57 am
Subject: Grand Mo-Gull
Rich Morrissey wrote:
<<perhaps Thompson is deliberately tweaking tradition, the way Baum did
more than once. Although the Cowardly Lion eventually does become a King of
Beasts, the King of Beasts in the Gillikin Forest (in MAGIC) is Gugu the
leopard. (Even more offbeat...since at least a leopard resembles a lion in
being a big, predatory cat...was the weasel king in THE WOGGLE-BUG BOOK.)
To make a gull, rather than an eagle, the king of the birds seems fully in
that mode to me...>>
Interesting comparison. Baum explains Gugu's perch on power (which doesn't
seem to be the steadiest) by saying that he and his advisors "hold their
high offices because they are more intelligent and more feared then their
fellows." He also shows Gugu's tension when the Cowardly Lion ("King of all
Beasts, the world over") shows up because everyone in the forest, including
the other lions, pay homage to the newcomer.
In contrast, the Grand Mo-Gull simply states he's the ruler of all birds.
Thompson doesn't highlight or justify how she might be "tweaking
tradition." Whatever she really had in mind, it seems characteristic that
Thompson doesn't explore how the gull came to claim that title. Baum is
consistently more interested and imaginative in discussing how rulers reach
their positions and retain them.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Thu Jan 4, 2001 9:13 pm
Subject: gulls
Ruth Berman wrote:
<<Do gulls need to be near an ocean? In summer we have a lot of gulls in
Minnesota, apparently quite happy hanging around freshwater lakes. (I'm not
sure if they're exactly the same gull as the seagull, but they look the
same to this uninstructed eye.)>>
They need to be near some water, I believe, and the bigger the gull, the
closer to the ocean. So the Grand Mo-Gull might need a lot of ocean and
dislike flying over a large swath of desert.
On the other hand, his large size might enable him to fly over the Deadly
Desert more easily and quickly than other birds. That still leaves the
question of how the blue gulls got word to him so fast in the first place.
My Oz novel manuscript actually includes a gull (a relatively small one)
flying into Oz. That bird's flight starts in the area near Hiland and
Loland where the Nonestic water comes closest to the Deadly Desert.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: "ruth berman" <berma005 at m...>
Date: Fri Jan 5, 2001 5:59 pm
Subject: mo-gulls in oz
Rich Morrissey and J.L. Bell: Interesting comments on choices of unexpected
rulers-of. In the case of the Mo-Gull, I suspect that RPT was not thinking
of a reason for choosing a gull as ruler in terms of actual gull
characteristics, but took it basically for the pun.
Ruth Berman

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:54 am
Subject: Seagulls
Ruth:
>J.L. Bell: Do gulls need to be near an ocean? In summer we have a lot of
>gulls in Minnesota, apparently quite happy hanging around freshwater lakes.
>(I'm not sure if they're exactly the same gull as the seagull, but they look
>the same to this uninstructed eye.)
Gulls can be found very far from the sea. There is, for instance, a
statue of a seagull in Salt Lake City commemorating an occasion,
early in the history of the Mormon settlement there, when a plague of
crickets were destroying their crops and threatening them with
famine; in a "miracle," a huge flock of seagulls appeared and ate
enough of the crickets to save most of the crops.